Karnataka Court March 1962 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Canara Industrial and Banking Syndicate Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Incom ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-06-1962
Reported in: [1964]51ITR479(KAR); [1964]51ITR479(Karn)
Hegde, J. 1. In this reference, under section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (Bombay Bench 'B') has referred two questions of law our opinion. They are : '(1) Whether initiation of action under section 34(1) for the purposes of making reassessment for the assessment year 1954-55 has been validly made (2) Whether interest on Mysore Durbar Securities has been rightly held to be chargeable to super-tax under the Indian Income-tax Act for the assessment years 1954-55 and 1956-57 ?' 2. The facts of the case as disclosed by the statement of the case submitted by the Tribunal to the extent relevant for our present purpose reads as follows : 3. These two reference applications arise out of the reassessments made upon the assessee, a public company, for the assessment year 1954-55 by taking recourse to the provisions of section 34 and the original assessment made upon it for the assessment year 1956-57. The corresponding previous years are the calend...
Karnatak Coffee Company Vs. Commercial Tax Officer, Davanagere
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-05-1962
Reported in: [1962]13STC658(Kar)
ORDERSomnath Iyer, J.1. This is an application by a firm dealing in coffee seeds and coffee powder, the turnover of whose inter-State sales of coffee powder for the period between 1st July, 1957, and 20th March, 1958, amounted to Rs. 1,22,866-38 nP. This turnover was the aggregate of the following :- Rs. nP. ------------------------------------------------------------------------(a) the turnover for the period between1st July, 1957, and 30th September, 1957 ... 49,352-78 (b) the turnover for the period between1st October, 1957, and 20th March, 1958 ... 73,513-60 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 2. These inter-State sales were assessed to sales tax under the provisions of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. The Commercial Tax Officer called upon the petitioner to pay tax on the turnover of the first period at 3 per cent. The turnover relating to the second period was divided by him into two parts. On a sum of Rs. 32,511-26 nP. he called upon the peti...
T.N. Ramachandra Setty Vs. B. Venugopal
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-05-1962
Reported in: AIR1963Mys19
K.S. Hegde, J.1. The only question for consideration is whether the claim made in O. S. No. 270 on 1955 is barred by limitation.2. O. S. No. 270/55 was brought by the Receiver appointed in O. S. No. 53 of 1953 on the file of the learned District Judge, Bangalore. He has also a party to O. S. No. 53/53. In the (SIC) under appeal the Receiver claimed a sum of Rs. 1000/- with interest from the defendant. It is alleged that the defendant encashed a cheque far Rs. 1000/- but failed to hand over that money to the Proprietors of B. S. J. Hall.3. In the suit, the trial Court framed four (SIC) They are:'1. Did the defendant encash the cheque for Rs. 1000/-? and hand over that amount to B. S. J. Hall on the same date to the knowledge of the plaintiff?2. Is the plaintiff estopped from claiming the sum of Rs. 1,000/-?3. Was the defendant only a carrier of the other partner Sri B. N. Rangiah Setty of his share? and4. Is the plaintiff not entitled to file the suit against the defendant?'The trial Co...
A.T. Parthasarathiah and Bros. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Mysore
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-01-1962
Reported in: [1963]48ITR830(KAR); [1963]48ITR830(Karn)
1. These are reference under section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act (to be referred to as the 'Act' hereinafter). 2. In both these references, a common question of law has been referred for our decision. That question is : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the income derived by the assessee from the sale of flower tamarind obtain on conversion of raw tamarind got from trees frown on assessee's own lands and on lands mortgaged with the assessee comes within the meaning of section 2(1)(b)(ii) so as to be exempt from tax under section 4(3)(viii) of the Indian Income-tax Act.' 3. The facts relevant for the purpose of deciding the point of law referred to us as found by the Tribunal are as follows : The assessee has tamarind trees in the lands which are in his possession either as owner or as mortgagee. He plucked tamarind from those trees; he made them into flower tamarind by a process of cleaning which involved removing fibre as well as seeds and thereafter ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›