Karnataka Court September 1966 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. Woodlands Co.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-09-1966
Reported in: ILR1966KAR1532; [1967]64ITR177(KAR); [1967]64ITR177(Karn); (1967)1MysLJ632
Hegde, J.1. The question of law referred for the opinion of this court is : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the sum of Rs. 2,400 formed part of the assessee's income ?' 2. The assessee in this case is a firm of partners. The partners in question are the partners of two different firms. One of the partnerships consisted of five partners, namely, the existing four partners and their late father, B. Munivenkatappa. The other partnership consisted of the afore-mentioned B. Munivenkatappa and his four sons. In this case we are concerned with the former partnership. The said Munivenkatappa died on October 17, 1960. Prior to that, by means of his will date May 14, 1958, he bequeathed his share in the second partnership referred to earlier to his four sons who were the remaining in partners in that firm, subject to the condition that they should pay to his daughter, Sharadamma, every month a sum of Rs. 200 during her lifetime. After the death of Munivenkatappa, his...
Commissioner of Gift-tax, Mysore Vs. Marutrarao Nayakoji Kadam
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-09-1966
Reported in: [1967]65ITR15(KAR); [1967]65ITR15(Karn); (1967)1MysLJ290
K.S. Hegde, J.1. The question referred to us under section 26(1) of the Gift-tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') is 'whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, could the assessee be said to have gifted properties to his sons which attracted tax under the Gift-tax Act'. 2. The following facts have been found by the Tribunal : (1) The properties both movable and immovable concerned in this case were the self-acquired properties of the assessee; (2) He divided those properties between himself and his four sons in the year 1954 and delivered to each of his sons shares in his movable and immovable properties; (3) The partition in the year 1954 was evidenced by an unregistered deed; and (4) That in the year 1957 he executed a registered partition deed, under which the division effected in 1954 with slight modifications was affirmed. 3. It is the contention of the revenue that under the deed of 1957 the assessee gifted his properties the favour of his sons on No...
The Canara Industrial and Banking Syndicate Ltd. Vs. V. Ramachandra Ga ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-09-1966
Reported in: AIR1968Kant133; AIR1968Mys133; (1967)1MysLJ490
Gopivallabha Iyengar, J.(1) The Appellant; in this appeal was the plaintiff in Original Suit No. 69 of 1958 on the file of the Subordinate Judge of South Kanara.(2) The plaintiff is a Banking Company. The first defendant is a merchant and commission agent carrying on business in Mangalore Town. The second defendant carries on business as a Public Carrier. The first defendant in the course of his business despatches goods through the second defendant to his customers at different places. On entrusting the goods to the second defendant, the first defendant obtains from him documents called 'Way Bills' to evidence the entrustment of the goods for carriage. The first defendant despatches the parcel way bills through the plaintiff Bank endorsing the same in blank in favour of the plaintiff. Along with the way Bill, the first defendant delivers a demand draft duly drawn on his customer. The plaintiff despatches the demand drafts and the way bills to its branch at the destination for purposes...
K.T. Appanna Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Mysore
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-08-1966
Reported in: [1967]64ITR310(KAR); [1967]64ITR310(Karn); (1967)1MysLJ44
K.S. Hegde, J.1. The question referred to this court for its opinion is : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the sums of Rs. 5,114, Rs. 7,889 and Rs. 3,000 realised by the assessee on the sale of plots in the previous years ending on 30th June, 1958, 30th June, 1959, and 30th June, 1960, were revenue profits chargeable to income-tax ?' 2. In this case, the relevant assessment years are 1959-60, 1960-61 and 1961-62. 3. On January 19, 1949, the assessee and three other persons constituted a partnership with a view to carry on business on the terms and conditions contained in the deed entered into by them. In pursuance of that agreement, they purchases on January 20, 1949, in their joint names two bungalow sites in Malleswaram. The object was to convert those sites into smaller building sites and effect sales thereof. The partners appointed one among them as their power-of-attorney for the purpose of carrying on the business of the partnership. On June 6, 1956, th...
Canara Minerals Private Ltd. Vs. the State of Mysore by Its Chief Secr ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-06-1966
Reported in: AIR1967Kant141; AIR1967Mys141; (1969)1MysLJ133
Narayana Pai, J.1. The original prayer in the writ petition was to quash or set aside a prospecting licence granted by the State Government to the fourth respondent under the Mineral Concession Rules in respect of a certain mining area of Holalkere. During the pendency of the writ petition, the State Government appears to have granted to Respondent 4, a regular mining lease covering the area or a portion of the area covered by the prospecting licence. In view of this new development the petitioner has filed I. A. No. 2 to amend the petition by adding the relevant averments and a prayer to quash the lease itself.2. The few facts which are relevant for the disposal of the writ petition, including the objections raised by the contesting respondents, may first be stated. Respondent 4's application for a prospecting licence was earlier in point of time. It was made to the State Government on February 9, 1962. The petitioner's application for a prospecting licence was made nearly two years t...
D.G. Bhagavan Vs. the Regional Transport Officer, Tumkur and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-06-1966
Reported in: AIR1967Kant139; AIR1967Mys139; (1966)2MysLJ649
Hegde, J.1. In this Writ Petition, the petitioner, who is the proprietor of S. C. S. Motor Service, Kadaba, prays for a writ of certiorari quashing the demand made by the Regional Transport Officer, Tumkur, as per his notice No. MYF. 520/63-64 dated 31-10-1963, and the Order of the Commissioner for Transport in Mysore, in No. XA/38/63-64, affirming in appeal the demand made by the R. T. O., Tumkur.2. The material facts of the case are these:3. The Petitioner is the proprietor of the Motor Vehicle bearing No. MYF. 520. He was operating on a route in Tumkur District. It appears that sometime in the beginning of 1963,the Superintendent of Police, Tumkur, inspected the vehicle and found it to be unfit for use on road. Therefore, A joint inspection was conducted by the R. T. O. and himself on 4-2-63-Thereafter, the R. T. O., Tumkur, cancelled the fitness certificate of the vehicle in question on 9-2-1963. The Petitioner returned to the R- T. O., the registration certificate as well as the t...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›