Karnataka Court August 1974 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.
A.L.N. Rao Charitable Trust Vs. Additional Commissioner of Income-tax, ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-01-1974
Reported in: [1975]101ITR838(KAR); [1975]101ITR838(Karn); 1974(2)KarLJ463
Venkataramiah, J. 1. The petitioner is a charitable trust. It was an assessee under the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), during the assessment year 1969-70. The Income-tax Officer was of the view that the assessee was not a genuine trust and hence was not entitled to the exemption s under provisions of the section 11 of the Act. Against the order of assessment passed by the Income tax Officer, the petition filed an appeal before the Income-tax Appellate Assistant Commissioner. pallet Assistant Commissioner dismissed the appeal. But in the appeal preferred by the ceases before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, it was held that the assessee was charitable trust and that, therefore, it was entitled to the exemptions under section 11 of the Act. I am informed that are fairness against the order of the tribunal is pending before is court. 2. After the Tribunal rendered its judgment in the appeal, the Income-tax Officer who was directed to post an order of assess...
Sharanappa Vs. Shrishailappa and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-01-1974
Reported in: ILR1974KAR1492; 1975(1)KarLJ83
1. This second appeal is by defendant 1 against the decree passed by the Civil Judge at Bijapur, in Regular Appeal No. 41 of 1967 reversing the decree passed by the Munsiff at Bagewadi in Civil Suit No. 77 of 1964.2. On the 15th of September, 1964, respondent 1 (plaintiff) instituted the suit for possession of the suit house and for future mesne profits and costs. The suit was resisted by the defendants on various grounds. The court of first instance dismissed the suit of the plaintiff. On appeal, the learned Civil Judge decreed the suit. Hence, this second appeal.3. Sri K.S. Savanur, learned counsel appearing for the appellant contended that the suit is clearly barred by Section 47 of the Civil P. C. in view of the decree passed in the previous suit viz., Civil Suit No. 25 of 1947 for possession of the same property in favour of the plaintiff-respondent 1. It is not disputed that respondent 1 obtained a decree in his favour for possession of the same suit schedule property in Civil Su...
J.T. Mathias Vs. A.M. Bangalorie and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-01-1974
Reported in: AIR1975Kant150; ILR1974KAR1439; 1975(1)KarLJ114
ORDER1. In this petition under Article 226, a candidate for the office of the Mayor of the Hubli-Dharwar Municipal Corporation, hereinafter called the 'Corporation', has prayed for the following relief:To issue a writ of mandamus directing respondents 1 and 2 to fix the date for the adjourned meeting for holding of election of Mayor and Deputy Mayor for the Corporation forthwith and to proceed with the election from the stage it was interrupted by the illegal adjournment made by respondent 1 and to complete the election in accordance with law.2. The events leading up to the petition are these:Respondent 1 is the outgoing Mayor of the Corporation. Respondent 2 is the Secretary of the Corporation. The Corporation was constituted and is governed by the provisions of the Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporations Act, 1949, hereinafter called 'the Act'. In the month of May, 1972, there was general election to the Corporation to elect its Councillors. After that election, the first meeting of...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›