Karnataka Court February 1975 Judgments
D.M. Jawarilal and ors. Vs. Special Land Acquisition Officer, Citb, Ba ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-28-1975
Reported in: AIR1975Kant129; 1975(1)KarLJ296
Acts/Rules/Orders: Karnataka Court-Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1958 - Sections 19, 48 and 49; Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - Sections 4(1), 9, 9(2), 11, 15, 23, 23(1), 23(2), 25(1), 26, 26(1) and 54; Bombay Court-fees Act, 1959 - Section 7(1)Cases Referred: Union of India v. Ram Mehar, AIR 1973 SC 305, 1973 SCD 73; K.A. Swamy v. Land Acquisition Officer, AIR 1970 Andh Pra 139, (1969) 1 Andh WR 381; Abdul Sultan v. Collector, Ahmednagar, AIR 1968 Bom 390, 70 Bom LR 203; Chandulal v. Eastern Railway, AIR 1967 Guj 182, 7 Guj LR 850; Sajjad Alikhan v. Secy. of State, AIR 1933 All 742, 145 Ind Cas 526; State of Maharashtra V. Mishrilal Tarachand Lodha, AIR 1964 SC 457, (1964) 5 SCR 230OPINION1. A Division Bench of this Court has referred the following question of law for the opinion of the Full Bench:'In an appeal under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, seeking for enhancement of the compensation, should the amount of statutory allowance proportionate to the amount of such enhancement...
Tag this Judgment!Sha Kanji Devji and ors. Vs. the Additional Commercial Tax Officer, Ii ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-21-1975
Reported in: (1976)5CTR(Kar)10; 1976(1)KarLJ56
ORDERVenkataramiah, J.1. Because common questions of law arise for consideration in these petitions, they are disposed by this common judgment. 2. Petitioners in all these petitions, were dealers in goods which had been declared by the Parliament as of special importance in inter-state trade or commerce under the provisions of the Central Sales Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the Central Act). Their purchase turnovers of the goods in question were liable to payment of purchase tax under section 5(4) read with Schedule IV of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957 (hereinafter to as the State Act). The period of assessment in all these cases is prior to 1967. According to the pronouncement of the Supreme Court in the State of Mysore vs. Yaddalam Lakshminarsimhiah Setty 1965 16 STC 231 the petitioners were not liable to pay Central Sales Tax even though the goods in question had been sold in the course of inter-State trade or commerce in view of section 9 of Central Act as it stood then re...
Tag this Judgment!B.A. Deshpande and ors. Vs. the Public Prosecutor
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-21-1975
Reported in: 1975CriLJ1761
ORDERD. Noronha, J.1. The Government of Mysore (now Karnataka) in order No. HD 544 SST 72. dated 31-1-1973. Authorised the Chief Secretary to sanction the lodging of a complaint on behalf of Sri B. Basavalingappa, then Minister for Municipal Administration and Housing. The Chief Secretary to Government acting under Section 198B (3) (b) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 (hereinafter referred to as the Code), and purporting to take all the facts and circumstances into consideration, accorded sanction to the Public Prosecutors of three districts, viz., Gulbarga, Bangalore and Bijapur, to file a complaint for an offence under Section 500, Indian P. C. against the various persons arrayed as the accused, to vindicate the honour and character of the Honourable Minister. Each of the three Public Prosecutors did so before the respective Sessions Judges as per Section 198-B of the Code.2. In Criminal Case No. 16/73 before the Sessions Court, Gulbarea, there were thirty-two accused. In Crim...
Tag this Judgment!Mandgi Brothers Vs. the State of Karnataka
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-18-1975
Reported in: 1975(2)KarLJ191; [1975]35STC410(Kar)
ORDERGovinda Bhat, C.J.1. This revision petition under section 23(1) of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957 (hereinafter called the 'Act'), preferred by the dealer, relates to the assessment year 1st April, 1971, to 31st March, 1972. 2. The short question that arises for decision is whether french-polish comes within the meaning of the word 'varnish' included in item No. 97 of the Second Schedule to the Act. 3. According to the dealer, french-polish does not come within the meaning of the word 'varnish' and it has to be taxed at the rate applicable to goods coming under sub-section (1) of section 5 of the Act. 4. The Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore, has, after an exhaustive discussion, come to the conclusion that french-polish is one class of varnishes and, therefore, falls under item No. 97 of the Second Schedule to the Act. 5. The dealer deals in french-polish. According to him, french-polish is not a varnish which, during the relevant period, was liable to tax at 6 per cent. I...
Tag this Judgment!Additional Commissioner of Income-tax, Bangalore Vs. P. Krishna Kamat
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-11-1975
Reported in: ILR1975KAR962; [1975]99ITR74(KAR); [1975]99ITR74(Karn)
Chandrashekhar, J.1. At the instance of the income-tax department, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore Bench, has under sub-section (1) of section 256 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), referred to this court the following question of law : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in law in holding that the term 'salary' occurring in section 10(10) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, includes the 'dearness allowance' and 'special allowance' for purposes of calculating the exempt portion of gratuity received by the assessee for the assessment year 1968-69 ?' 2. The facts relevant for decision of the above question, as found in the statement of the case by the Appellate Tribunal, are briefly these' : The respondent-assessee was an employee of the Canara Bank. On his retirement, he was paid a gratuity of Rs. 23,250. Out of that amount, he claimed under section 10(10) of the Act exemption in respect of ...
Tag this Judgment!A.S. Krishna Setty and Sons Vs. Additional Commissioner of Income-tax, ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-11-1975
Reported in: ILR1975KAR956; [1975]100ITR587(KAR); [1975]100ITR587(Karn)
Venkataramiah, J.1. At the instance of the assessee, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore Bench, had made the above reference under section 256(1) of Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), requesting this court to give its opinion on the following question : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the development rebate allowed in the assessment for the year 1965-66 was rightly withdrawn under section 155(5)(i) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?' The facts leading to the above reference are as follows : The assessee is a firm carrying on business at Arsikere. During the assessment year 1965-66, it was carrying on business as mundy merchants and it also owned a cinema theatre, a rotary oil mill and a coir factory. Development rebate of plant and machinery used in the oil mills and coir factory under section 33 of the Act, and the same had been allowed by the assessing authority. The firm consisted of 7 partners. 2 minors had also been admitt...
Tag this Judgment!Shrishailappa Vs. Commercial Tax Officer, Jamkhandi and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-07-1975
Reported in: ILR1975KAR1192; 1975(2)KarLJ190; [1975]36STC223(Kar)
ORDERVenkataramiah, J.1. The petitioner is a dealer in dyes. Under the provisions of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, as it stood immediately prior to 10th September, 1970, the petitioner was liable to pay sales tax on the turnover relating to dyes at 6 per cent of the turnover - vide entry 97 of Schedule II of the Act as in force then. By virtue of a notification issued under section 8A dated 10th September, 1970, by the State Government, the sales tax payable on the turnover relating to dyes was reduced to 4 per cent. The petitioner was payable sales tax accordingly till 1st April, 1974. The sales tax payable in respect of dyes was enhanced to 8 per cent by the Karnataka Sales Tax (Amendment) Act (Act 14 of 1974) by the State Legislature with effect from 1st April, 1974. Again by another notification issued by the State Government on 7th June, 1974, the sales tax payable on dyes was reduced to 4 per cent with effect from 1st July, 1974. In this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed fo...
Tag this Judgment!Krishnarajendra Mills Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-07-1975
Reported in: 1989(20)LC216(Karnataka)
ORDERE.S. Venkataramiah, J.1. The petitioner is a Company manufacturing textile goods in Mysore City. Under the Central Excises and Salt Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) excise duty was leviable by virtue of Entry 19 in Schedule I of the Act on some of the cotton fabrics manufactured by the petitioner. By a notification issued by the Central Government on March 1 1969 as amended by Notifications dated 6.6.1970, 29.5.1971 and 20.6.1971 cotton fabrics-medium-A Grey (unprocessed), cotton fabrics-medium-B Grey (unprocessed) arid Bleached of/and dyed but not printed were exempted from1 payment of excise duty levied under the Act. Under the Khadi and other Handloom Industries Development (Additional Excise Duty on Cloth) Act (No. 12 of 19S3) (hereinafter referred to as Act 12 of 1953) additional excise duty was leviable on cloth. Under a notification issued by the Government of India dated 25.7.1953 all varieties of cloth which were for the time being exempted from the payment of exc...
Tag this Judgment!The Special Land Acquisition Officer, Hassan Vs. M.S. Mallesha
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-04-1975
Reported in: ILR1975KAR1008; 1975(2)KarLJ74
G.K. Govinda Bhat, C.J.1. These appeals by the Special Land Acquisition Officer, Hemavathi Reservoir Project, II, Hassan, are directed against the common Award and Decrees dated 17th November, 1973 made in L.A.C. Nos. 70 and 77 of 1973 on the file of the Court of the Civil Judge, Hassan.2. Several acres of wet and dry lands situate in Mandira village, Alur Taluk in Hassan District, were acquired for the Hemavathi Reservoir Project, pursuant to the Preliminary Notification published in the Mysore Gazette dated 2nd January, 1971. The Land Acquisition Officer, in the award made by him under Section 11 of the Land Acquisition Act, fixed the market value at Rs. 2.200 an acre for dry Lands and at Rs. 5,400 an acre for wet lands. The basis of his valuation was the capitalisation of the net income assessed by him. He assessed the net income of the dry land at Rs. 150 an acre and that of the wet land at Rs. 362 an acre. He employed the multiple of 15 and capitalised the net income for the purpo...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›