Karnataka Court September 1965 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.
Commissioner of Income-tax, Mysore Vs. B.V. Raman
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-13-1965
Reported in: [1966]59ITR20(KAR); [1966]59ITR20(Karn); (1966)1MysLJ293
Hegde, J.1. This is a reference under section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, to be hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'. The question of law referred to by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras Bench, to this court for its opinion is : 'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the sum of Rs. 10,483.00 is an allowable expenditure under section 10 (2) (xv) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922. [The learned judge set out the statement of case which ran as follows :] 2. The assessee is an astrologer by profession. He carries on business in the printing and publishing of books on astrology. He also runs an astrological magazine. In March, 1959, he was elected as the Second Vice President of the International Congress of Astro scientists. A session of the Congress was held in New York between 2nd and 10th October, 1959. The conference director wrote to the assessee : 'Your attendance at New York this coming October 2nd to 10th - at the World Congress of Astro sc...
G.T. Venkataswamy Reddy and ors. Vs. K.V. Puttanarasimharaju and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-10-1965
Reported in: AIR1966Kant341; AIR1966Mys341; (1965)2MysLJ719
K.S. Hegde, J.(1) All these petitions under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution arise from the decision of the Mysore Revenue Appellate Tribunal Bangalore to be hereinafter referred to as the 'Tribunal' in Appeal No. 390 of 1964(M.V) on it stile. They raise common questions of law for decision. Hence they will be dealt with in one Order.(2) In these petitions the aforementioned Order of the Tribunal was challenged on tow grounds namely (1) the Tribunal had no jurisdiction to entertain the appeal in question and (ii) under any circumstances, the impugned Order suffers from errors of law apparent on the face of the records.(3) The contention that the Tribunal had no jurisdiction to entertain the appeal in question was not pressed at the hearing of these Writ Petitions possibly because the same is concluded by the decision of this Court in W.P. Nos. 458 and 630 of 1965. Therefore, the only surviving question for decision is whether the impugned Order suffers from errors of law appare...
Canara Workshops Ltd. Vs. Union of India
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-09-1965
Reported in: [1966]36CompCas553(Kar); (1965)2MysLJ520
Sadasivayya, J.1. The petitioner in this case is Messrs. Canara Workshops Ltd., a public company having its registered office at Kodialbail, Mangalore-3. One V.S. Kudva was the managing director of the said company till March 31, 1956. From April 1, 1956, till March 31, 1960, the was acting as technical adviser of the petitioner- company on a remuneration of Rs.750 per mensem. On April 20, 1960, the company passed a resolution increasing the remuneration of V.S. Kudva to Rs.2,000 per mensem from April 1, 1960, subject to the approval of the Central Government. On January 2, 1961, the respondent sent the communication, exhibit 'C', approving the increase of remuneration of V.S. Kudva from Rs.750 per mensem to Rs.1,000 per mensem, with effect from 1st April, 1960, for his acting an the director-cum-technical adviser of company. A copy of the communication issued in this connection by the respondent is marked exhibit 'C'. Accordingly, V.S. Kudva was paid remuneration at Rs.1,000 per mense...
C.B. Basappa Vs. State of Mysore
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-09-1965
Reported in: [1966]17STC5(Kar)
ORDERHegde, J.1. This is a revision petition under section 23 of the Mysore Sales Tax Act, 1957, read with section 9(3) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, which will be hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'. The question of law raised in this revision petition is, 'whether inter-State sales to unregistered dealers fall within section 8(2) of the Act'. 2. The petitioner is a registered dealer in this State. During the assessment year 1958-59 (from 1st July, 1958, to 30th June, 1959) the petitioner sold certain goods to some dealers in Patna and Calcutta. The goods sold by him are not declared goods. The concerned dealers in Calcutta and Patna were not registered dealers. The question for decision is whether the turnover relating to those sales are liable to be taxed under section 6 read with section 8(2) of the Act. The Sales Tax Authorities as well as the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal have come to the conclusion that the turnover in question is liable to be taxed under section 6 in acco...
Puttananjamma and anr. Vs. P.M. Channabasavanna and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-08-1965
Reported in: AIR1967Kant41; AIR1967Mys41
Somnath Iyer, J.1. On June 19, 1953, defendant 1 who is the appellant before us, created a usufruct mortgage in favour of a certain Mallanna. The property mortgaged consisted of two items, a house and a wet land. The principal sum secured by the mortgage was Rs. 16,000. The mortgage deed was Ext. P-2. On October 31, 1958, Mallanna's three sons brought a suit for the recovery of a sum of Rs. 23,280/- which according to them, represented the amount due under the mortgage. This was the aggregate of the principal sum of Rs. 16,000/- and Rs. 7,280/- which represented interest for the period between January 15, 1955 and October 30, 1958.2. On the same date on which the mortgage deed was executed, there was a lease deed executed in favour of the mortgagor by the mortgagee. Under that lease deed there was a lease back of the mortgaged properties. A sum of Rs. 97-8-0 was the rent payable for the house every month. Thirty pallas of paddy of the value of Rs. 750 constituted the rent payable for t...
Hind Mercantile Corporation (P.) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Commercial T ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-03-1965
Reported in: (1965)2MysLJ705; [1966]17STC175(Kar)
Hedge, J.1. These are appeals under Section 24(1) of the Mysore Sales Tax Act, 1957, to be hereinafter referred to as the 'Act' against the common order passed by the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes in Mysore to be hereinafter referred as the 'Commissioner' in C.T.R.P. Nos. 312 and 313 of 1962-63 on his file. In those proceedings, the petitioner's liability to pay sales tax during the second half of 1957-58 and 1958-59 came up for consideration. In those proceedings the Commissioner revised the order of the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes in certain respects. 2. The material facts of this case are these : The assessee is a dealer in iron and manganese ore. In the course of the relevant assessment years, the assessee had made certain purchases of iron and manganese ore. According to him, part of his purchases was made in the course of his inter-State trade and the other part in the course of export outside India. The Commercial Tax Officer rejected both these contentions and as...
Mascarenhas (J.H.) Vs. Ubban Estate, Sakleshpur and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-01-1965
Reported in: (1967)ILLJ649Kant
Hegde, J.1. In this writ petition under Art. 227 of the Constitution, the petitioner contends that the order of respondent 2 in Application No. 74 of 1962 on its file suffers from errors of law apparent on the face of the records and, therefore, we should quash the same. 2. Application No. 74 of 1962 was an application under S. 33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, to be hereinafter referred to as the Act. The petitioner was an employee under respondent 1. There is dispute between the parties as to his length of service under respondent 1. According to him, he served respondent 1 for a period of 23 years, whereas, according to respondent 1, he was his employee only for a period of about 15 years. This controversy is not very material for the decision of this case. 3. On 24 March, 1958, an agreement was entered into between the Planters' Association and the Estates Staffs' Union of South India. As per that agreement, the age of superannuation of an employee was fixed at 55 years....
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›