Karnataka Court October 1973 Judgments
D.V. Dasappa Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Mysore
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-31-1973
Reported in: [1974]96ITR523(KAR); [1974]96ITR523(Karn)
Srinivasa Iyengar, J. 1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore Bench, has stated a case a referred under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the following question of law as arising out of its order dated March 5, 1970, in Income-tax Appeals Nos. 186 and 187 (Bangalore) of 1969-70. 'Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the sums of Rs. 1,000 and Rs. 10,348 are liable to be included in the total income of the Hindu undivided family for the assessment year 1965-66 Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the sums of Rs. 14,750 and Rs. 11,348 are liable to be included in the total income of the Hindu undivided family for the assessment year 1966-67 ?' 2. The matters relate to the assessments for 1965-66 and 1966-67 of a Hindu undivided family assessed in the name of D. V. Dasappa. The relevant accounting years are the ones ended March 31, 1965, and M...
Tag this Judgment!K.N.K. Keddy Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Mysore
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-31-1973
Reported in: ILR1974KAR196
Srinivasa Iyengar, J. 1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore Bench, has stated a case under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and referred the following question of law for the opinion of this court : 'On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, whether, within the meaning of section 275 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, penalty order must not only be made within two years of the completion of proceedings for the imposition of penalty concerned but also communicated to the assessee within the said period of limitation?' 2. The facts relating to the said question may briefly be stated. The Income-tax Officer, City Circle, Bangalore, imposed a penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, against the assessee in relation to the assessment for 1963-64. The assessment for the said year was made on 22nd January, 1964. Certain cash credits were noticed in the books of the assessee amounting to Rs. 11,500 and the sources for these were not explained by the ...
Tag this Judgment!K.N.K. Reddy Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-31-1973
Reported in: [1974]97ITR450(KAR); [1974]97ITR450(Karn)
Srinivasa Iyengar, J. 1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal,Bangalore Bench, has stated a case under Section 256(1) of the Income-taxAct, 1961, and referred the following question of law for the opinion ofthis court: 'On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, whether, within the meaning of Section 275 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, penalty order must not only be made within two years of the completion of the proceedings for the imposition of penalty concerned but also communicated to the assessee within the said period of limitation ?'2. The facts relating to the said question may briefly be stated. The Income-tax Officer, City Circle, Bangalore, imposed a penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, against the assessee in relation to the assessment for 1963-64. The assessment for the said year was made on 22nd January, 1964. Certain cash credits were noticed in the books of the assessee amounting to Rs. 11,500 and the sources for these were not explained by the ...
Tag this Judgment!Kishindas Agencies Vs. the State of Mysore
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-30-1973
Reported in: ILR1974KAR446; 1974(1)KarLJ149; [1974]33STC65(Kar)
ORDERGovinda Bhat, C.J. 1. These revision petitions preferred by an assessee under section 23(1) of the Mysore Sales Tax Act, 1957, hereinafter called the Act, relate to the assessment years 1967-68 and 1968-69. The assessee manufactures 'felt washers', which are used as components in the manufacture of 'micro filters'. During the assessment years the assessee sold the 'felt washers', manufactured by him to M/s. Motor Industries Co. for manufacture of 'micro filters'. Before the assessing authority, the assessee claimed that on his turnover relating to sales of 'felt washers' he is liable to pay tax only at the concessional rate provided under section 5(3A) of the Act, which claim was accepted by the Additional Commercial Tax Officer who passed the assessment orders. 2. However, the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes in exercise of the powers conferred by section 21(2) of the Act revised the orders of the Additional Commercial Tax Officer and held that the assessee is not entitled...
Tag this Judgment!T.G. Nandakumar Vs. Controller of Estate Duty
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-29-1973
Reported in: [1974]96ITR130(KAR); [1974]96ITR130(Karn)
Govinda Bhat, C.J. 1. Under section 64(1) of the Estate Duty Act, 1953, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore Bench, has stated a case and referred the following two question of law for the opinion of this court : '1. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the inclusion of the value of cash gifts of Rs. 10,000 each made by the deceased in favour of the minor daughters, by applying the provisions of section 10 of the Estate Duty Act, 1953, is valid in law 2. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the inclusion of Rs. 15,000 which was a deposit made by the done in the firm of Messrs. T. Govinda Rao and Sons as property belonging to the deceased by applying the provisions of section 10 of the Estate Duty Act, 1953, is valid in law ?' 2. One Govinda Rao, the deceased, who died on July 27, 1967, was a partner in a firm called 'M/s. T. Govinda Rao & Sons, Raichur'. The accountable person contested the inclusion of several items of assets before the Assista...
Tag this Judgment!R.R. Diwakar and ors. Vs. V.B. Guttal
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-19-1973
Reported in: 1975CriLJ90
ORDERSanthosh, J.1. The petitioners before this Court are Al, A2 and A3 respectively in the Court of the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Fourth Court. Bangalore, in C.C. No. 396 of 1973. A private complaint was filed by the respondent against them and A4 alleging that they had committed the offences under Sections 455 and 471, I.P.C. The learned Magistrate took cognizance of the offences and issued summons to the accused. This order passed by the learned Magistrate issuing summons to the accused is challenged in this revision petition.2. Sri K. J. Shetty. the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners, has contended that the complaint is not maintainable as it is barred by Sub-clause (c) of Section 195, Cr. P. C, His argument is that an enquiry is pending before the Additional District Magistrate under the Press and Registration of Books Act, 1867, which will hereinafter be referred to as the Act, and when the said enquiry was pending a declaration has been made and if it...
Tag this Judgment!The State of Mysore Vs. Krishna Rice and Saw Mills
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-18-1973
Reported in: [1974]33STC398(Kar)
ORDERGovinda Bhat, C.J. 1. The respondent assesses is the proprietor of a rice and saw mill carrying on business under the name and style 'Krishna Rice and Saw Mills, Udipi'. The assessee sold sawdust to his labourers. The turnover in respect of the sale of sawdust was estimated at Rs. 3,000. The assessee claimed exemption in respect of the said turnover claiming that sawdust comes within the meaning of the expression 'firewood', which is in the Fifth Schedule of the Mysore Sales Tax Act, 1957. The Commissioner of Commercial Taxes did no accept the contention of the assessee. But on appeal to the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal in S.T.A. No. 80 of 72 the said Tribunal held that sawdust is included within the meaning of the expression 'firewood' under serial No. 29 of the fifty Schedule. In doing so, the Tribunal followed its earlier decision rendered in S.T.A. Nos. 307 and 308 of 71. The State has preferred the above revision petition challenging the correctness of the view taken by the T...
Tag this Judgment!K. Hiriyanna Setty Vs. State of Mysore
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-18-1973
Reported in: 1975CriLJ96; (1973)2MysLJ528
ORDERSantosh, J.1. Petitioner before this Court is the 2nd accused in C.C. 2992/72 on the file of the II City Magistrate, Mysore. Proceedings had been instituted against accused 1 and 2 under Section 67 of the Factories Act, 1948. While the case was pending on the application made by the A.P.P. under Section 94, Cr.P.C. the learned Magistrate issued summons to the 2nd accused to produce certain documents which were in his custody. This order issuing summons to the 2nd accused, is challenged in this revision petition.2. Sri V. N. Satyanarayana, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, has contended that the learned Magistrate was not competent to issue such summons to the petitioner as the same is hit by Sub-clause (3) of Article 20 of the Constitution of India. Strong reliance is placed on the decision of the Supreme Court in M. P. Sharma v. Satish Chandra AIR 1954 SC 300 : 1954 Cri LJ 865 and on the decision of the Madras High Court in Swarnalingam Chettiar v. Asst Labou...
Tag this Judgment!R.R. Kashappanavar Vs. the State of Mysore
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-16-1973
Reported in: [1974]34STC334(Kar)
Govinda Bhat, C.J.1. This is an appeal by a dealer under section 24(1) of the Mysore Sales Tax Act, 1957, hereinafter called the Act, against the order of the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes in Mysore made in Case No. S.M.R. 2/71-72 dated 4th March, 1972, by which the Commissioner in exercise of his suo motu powers of revision under section 22-A of the Act set aside the orders of the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes made in appeal and also the order of assessment made by the Commercial Tax Officer, Haveri. 2. For the period from 3rd November, 1967, to 21st October, 1968, the dealer submitted a return of turnover of Rs. 89,886.04. The Commercial Tax Officer, Haveri, who was the assessing authority, did not accept the turnover returned and he made an order of assessment on best of judgment basis determining the turnover at Rs. 2,36,500. The business of the dealer was that of a manufacturer of beaten rice by pounding paddy for which he consumed electricity. The Commercial Tax Offi...
Tag this Judgment!Yeshwant Raghunath Bhide Vs. Income-tax Officer (Collection), Hubli
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-11-1973
Reported in: [1974]44CompCas290(Kar); [1974]94ITR370(KAR); [1974]94ITR370(Karn); 1974(1)KarLJ280
ORDERJagannath Shetty, J.1. The decision on the question raised in this writ petition depends upon the interpretation of section 179 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (shortly called 'the Act'). 2. The facts are these : Yeshwant Raghunath Bhide, the petitioner, was one of the directors of a company called the Bijapur Engineering and Auto-Works Private Ltd. It was incorporated as a private limited company under the provision of the Indian Companies Act, 1913. The company was carrying on its business for a couple of years and, thereafter, it is said that it landed in difficulties and it stopped its business. For the assessment year 1957-58, the company was assessed to income-tax under the provisions of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, on a total income of Rs. 2,933 and the tax assessed thereon worked out to Rs. 1,510.50. With a little assets remaining with the company, a portion of the tax was paid and the balance of Rs. 1,336 remained outstanding. The Income-tax Officer (Collection), Hubli, w...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »