Karnataka Court March 1963 Judgments
S. Natarajan Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Mysore
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-10-1963
Reported in: [1964]52ITR882(KAR); [1964]52ITR882(Karn)
K.S. Hegde, J.1. By these applications under section 66(1), the assessed requires the Tribunal to draw up a statement and to refer certain questions of law which are said to arise out of the said order. In our opinion, a question of law arises out of the aforesaid Tribunal's order, we draw up a statement of the case, agreed to by both the parties, and refer it to the High Court. As the facts are common a consolidated statement of the case is drawn. 2. The assessed started a film distribution business under the name and style of M/s. Zenith Movies on October 27, 1951. Books of account in respect of the above business were closed on 31st October of every year. 3. In the belief that the assessed would have earned a taxable income in respect of the assessment years 1953-54, 11954-55 and 1955-56, proceedings were initiated by the Income-tax Officer under section 34 in respect of these years by issue of notice dated May 30, 1957, and served on June 3, 1957. These notices were accompanied by ...
Tag this Judgment!K. Vaman Shenoy Vs. Collector of South Kanara, Mangalore
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-07-1963
Reported in: AIR1964Kant64; AIR1964Mys64; 1964CriLJ418; ILR1963KAR670; (1963)2MysLJ258
1. The appellant has preferred this appeal against the order, dated 16th March 1959, passed by the District Judge of South Kanara in Appeal Suit No. 154 of 1958, by which he confirmed the order of the trial Court and directed that the execution petition be proceeded with according to law.2. The facts leading to this appeal may shortly be stated as follows:3. The appellant was convicted for offences punishable under Sections 477A and 409 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,500/- and in default of payment of fine to suffer further imprisonment for a period of 2 1/2 years. The date of this order is not available hOWever, there seems to be no dispute that the appellant has served the substantive sentence of one year and since there was default in payment of fine, tie was undergoing the default sentence. It appears that during the course or his imprisonment, he made a part payment of Rs. 1,242/- towards the sentence of fine ...
Tag this Judgment!Coffee Board Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Agricultural Income-tax, Mysor ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-05-1963
Reported in: [1964]52ITR126(KAR); [1964]52ITR126(Karn)
Hegde, J.1. These are references under section 55(2) of the Mysore Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1957, to be hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'. In both these petitions, the assessee is the Coffee Board, a body incorporated under Central Act VII of 1942. 2. I.T.R.C. No. 10 of 1961 relates to the assessment year 1958-59 and L.T.R.C. No. 11 of 1961 relates to the assessment year 1959-60. 3. The questions of law referred for the opinion of this court ar : '1. Whether or not having regard t : (a) the nature and constitution of the Board and its Research Department; (b) the nature of the activity carried on by the Research Department in maintaining two research stations; and (c) all other relevant factors, the Board derives 'income' liable to agricultural income-tax under the provisions of the Mysore Agricultural Income-tax Act? 2. Whether or not, the same derived by the Coffee Board from the farms maintained by the Research Department thereof, are exempt from liability to assessment of...
Tag this Judgment!Shop Siddegowda and Family Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Mysore
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-04-1963
Reported in: [1964]53ITR57(KAR); [1964]53ITR57(Karn)
Hegde, J.1. Two question were referred under section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 (to be hereinafter referred to as the Act) by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras Bench. They are : '(1) Whether it is incumbent on the officer passing an order under section 28(1)(c) to hear the assessee or afford him a reasonable opportunity of being heard before passing such order, even though his predecessor had given such reasonable opportunity of being heard (2) Whether the imposition of the same penalty even when the maximum livable has been lowered was justified ?' 2. The material facts are as follows : The assessee deals in cardamom, stationery and sundry articles in Sakalespur in Mysore State. He also derives income from other businesses. For the assessment year 1957-58, it returned a loss of Rs. 4,961 from those business. The Income-tax Officer came to the conclusion that the assessee had concealed an income of Rs. 41,900. The order of the Income-tax Officer in this regard wa...
Tag this Judgment!Konkalkonda Narasiah Govindappa Yadgiri Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-03-1963
Reported in: [1964]53ITR754a(KAR); [1964]53ITR754a(Karn)
Hegde, J.1. This is a reference under section 66(2) of the Indian Income-tax Act in compliance with the order of this court dated July 20, 1959, made in C.P. (H) No. 44 of 1956. 2. The question submitted to this court are as follows : '(i) whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the assessing authority should have assessed the cash credit of Rs. 10,700 as income from undisclosed sources for the assessment year 1952-53 or 1953-54 (ii) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in recording a finding that the cash credit of Rs. 10,700 is income from undisclosed sources without considering the assessee's explanation of having brought the said amount from his home treasury ?' 3. The facts as found by the Tribunal are as follows : The assessee is a Hindu undivided family. The assessment year is 1953-54, the relevant accounting year being the year ended on October 18, 1952. 4. In the personal account of Konkalkonda Govin...
Tag this Judgment!Pangal Nayak Bank Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Mysore
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-02-1963
Reported in: [1964]52ITR915(KAR); [1964]52ITR915(Karn)
1. The Madras Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following question under section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 192 : 'Whether the sum of Rs. 10,000 is income assessable under any of the provisions of the Income-tax Act?' 2. The learned judge set out the statement of facts which ran as follow : The assessee is a public company carrying on the business of banking. Its authorised, subscribed and paid-up share capital as on December 31, 1956, are as follow : Authorised ... Rs. 2,00,000.Subscribed ... Rs. 2,00,000.Paid-up ... Rs. 2,00,000.3. In the year 1957, its share capital was raised from Rs. 2 lakhs to Rs. 3,98,000. On the new shares issued, it collected Rs. 10,000 as entrance fees by charging at the rate of annas eight for the every share under the authority of article 17 which is as follow : 'No person shall be considered as a shareholder until he has paid the prescribed entrance fee and premiums, if any, fixed per share, and the whole of the share value or the amo...
Tag this Judgment!G.M. Mohan Vs. Agricultural Income-tax Officer, Coorg and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-01-1963
Reported in: [1964]52ITR478(KAR); [1964]52ITR478(Karn)
Hegde, J.1. Two contentions were advanced by Sri K. Shivashankar Bhat, the learned counsel for the petitioner, at the hearing of this writ petition. They ar : (i) rule 33 of the Mysore Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1957 (to be referred to hereinafter as the 'Act'), is ultra vires the powers of the rule making authority; and (ii) the assessing authorities could not have levied any tax on the price fetched by the sale of rosewood timber. 2. In order to pronounce on the correctness of these contentions, it is necessary to refer to the relevant provisions of the 'Act'. Section 3 is the charging section. It provides for levy of agricultural income-tax on agricultural income for each financial year commencing from April 1, 1957. Section 5 provides for certain deductions. Section 5(k) reads thu : '5. The agricultural income of a person shall be computed after making the following deductions, namely :.... (k) any expenditure (not being in the nature of capital expenditure) laid out or expended...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›