Karnataka Court February 1981 Judgments
Ananthapadmanabhaiah Vs. the Tahsildar (Executive Magistrate), T. Nars ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-16-1981
Reported in: AIR1982Kant27; ILR1981KAR503
D.M. Chandrashekhar, C.J.1. This appeal is from the ruling of Puttaswamy J., regarding the court-fee payable in Writ Petition No. 11630 of 1978.The petitioner therein has presented this appeal For the sake of convenience, he will hereinafter be referred to as the petitioner.2. In the writ petition, the petitioner had impugned the order of the Tahsildar and Taluk Executive Magistrate, T. Narasipur (hereinafter referred to as 'the Executive Magistrate') dated 7-8-1978 rejecting his (the petitioner's) application made under - the Karnataka Debt Relief Act, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act). In that application, he had prayed for declaring the mortgages executed by him in favour of respondents 2 to 11 in the writ petition, -as having stood redeemed and for putting him in possession of the mortgaged properties. The Executive Magistrate dismissed- that application holding that he (the petitioner) was not a 'debtor' as defined in clause (c) of Section 3 of the Act.3. The office of th...
Tag this Judgment!Vaikunthrao Rayappa Kamat Vs. the Commercial Tax Officer, Sirsi (N.K. ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-13-1981
Reported in: 1981(1)KarLJ471; [1981]48STC57(Kar)
ORDERChandrakantaraj Urs, J.1. The petitioner is a dealer in betel-nuts at Sirsi, Uttara Kannada District. He obtained refund of Central sales tax in the sum of Rs. 57,286.00 on account of the decision of the Supreme Court in the Yaddalam's case : [1965]2SCR129 . However, in 1969, the Central Sales Tax Act came to be amended with retrospective effect resulting in tax being levied on betel-nuts. The petitioner was, therefore, bound to return the refunded tax. He made an application on 3rd February, 1975, that he may be permitted to pay back the refunded tax in instalments. The tax related to the assessment years 1957-58 to 1964-65. The Commissioner by his order dated 8th September, 1975, sanctioned instalments at Rs. 5,000.00 per month for the first 10 months and the balance being paid in a lump sum as the 11th and final instalment. The petitioner paid back this amount as ordered by the Commissioner within the period stipulated in the order of the Commissioner, a copy of which is at ann...
Tag this Judgment!Gauribidnaur Sahakara Sakkare Karkhane Ltd. Vs. the Government of Andh ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-13-1981
Reported in: AIR1981Kant187; 1981(1)KarLJ555
ORDER1. The writ petitioner is a Cooperative Society registered under the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959 and is running a Sugar Factory at Gouribidanur in Kolar Dist. Gouribidanur is approximately at a distance of 15 kilometres away from the Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh border in Karnataka. The sugarcane growers of Andhra Pradesh approached the petitioner Society, according to the writ petitioner, with a request to purchase the sugarcane grown by them with a view to alleviate the suffering of the sugarcane growers from Andhra Pradesh and the Board of Management of the petitioner Society resolved to purchase the sugarcane grown by them. Pursuant to the said resolution of the Board, the Society purchased the sugarcane during the years 1973-74, 1974-75 and 1975-76. The petitioner has further submitted that at the time when the Board resolved to purchase the sugarcane from the growers in Andhra Pradesh, the purchase of sugarcane was exempted from tax under the General Sales Tax...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner, Corporation of the City of Bangalore Vs. Kapoor Chand Br ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-11-1981
Reported in: AIR1982Kant23; 1981(1)KarLJ522
1. These Miscellaneous First Appeals are instituted by the original defendant, namely, the Commissioner, Corporation of the City of Bangalore, against the orders passed on I. As. I and III in the two suits, namely, 0. S. 1575/80-9663/1980 and 0. S. 1579/1980 - 10419/1980, dated 9-12-1980 by the III Additional City Civil Judge, Bangalore.2. The facts germane for the decision of the question at issue in these two appeals are these :In respect of premises bearing Nos. 771 to 774, 0. T. C Road, Chickpet, Banglore, notices under S. 322(1) of the Karnataka Municipalities Act, 1976 (hereinafter r6feffOd to as the Act), were issued by the Commissioner, Corporation of the City of Bangalore, to owners and occupiers requiring them to demolish the buildings and to keep the premises clean. In premises Nos. 772 and 773, the occupiers Kapoorchand Brothers Private Limited, who are the tenants in the building, filed 0. S. 1575/1980 for permanent injunction against the defendant-Corporation from demolis...
Tag this Judgment!Jagannath Dattatrreya Shah Vs. Collector of Central Excise and Customs ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-10-1981
Reported in: 1989(20)LC257(Karnataka); 1983(12)ELT233(Kar); ILR1981KAR896; 1981(1)KarLJ387
ORDER1. The petitioner on 30-7-1973 was the registered owner of a motor lorry bearing registration No. MHD 8539. It was seized by the officials of the Customs Authorities, Bangalore, on Bangalore-Tumkar Road (about 9 miles from Bangalore) as it was carrying smuggled articles. It was searched and it was found to be carrying some contraband articles valued at Rs. 50,505/-. In the circumstance a mahazar was drawn up and the lorry was also seized and the driver was arrested. In the mahazar the value of the lorry was shown at Rs. 40,000/- however, the Assistant Controller of Central Excise and Customs released the said lorry to the petitioner on his depositing the sum of Rs. 5,000/- in cash and also executing a bond for Rs. 70,000/-. One of the conditions in the bond so executed was that the petitioner would produce the lorry as and when required by the specified Customs Authorities or Courts. Further under the terms of the bond, if he failed to do so a sum of Rupees 70,000/- was recoverabl...
Tag this Judgment!The Gulbarga Central Co-operative Wholesale Stores Ltd. Vs. the Chandr ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-09-1981
Reported in: AIR1982Kant160; 1981(1)KarLJ335
1. This is a plaintiff's Second Appeal against the concurrent findings of the Courts below.2. The appellant-plaintiff is a Cooperative Wholesale Stores registered under the Co-operative Societies Act.The respondent-defendant is a proprietary concern carrying on business in the name and style of Chandrakant Dall Mill. The parties will be referred to in the course of this order by the position and rank assigned to them in the trial Court.3. The plaintiff-Society entered into an agreement dated 19-5-1965 with the defendant-Mill for getting certain quantities of paddy hulled. It is unnecessary to set out in detail the terms of the agreement except to state that the defendant Mill was required to deposit Rs. 1,000/ for due performance of the contract which was liable to be forfeited in the event of any default in the performance by the defendant under the contract, in accordance with the terms therein. The agreement provided also for, payment of hulling charges at the specified rate to the ...
Tag this Judgment!K. Siddalingaiah and anr. Vs. Income Tax Officer
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-06-1981
Reported in: (1981)25CTR(Kar)338; ILR1981KAR741
ORDERChandrakantaraj Urs, J.1. The above petitions are disposed of by this common order as the facts and questions of law raised are the same in both the petitions and are directed against the common order passed by the respondent ITO, Hssan. 2. The petitioners are residents of Hassan. They are aggrieved by the order made by the respondent-ITO, Hassan Circle, Hassan u/s 281 of the IT Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). 3. The undisputed facts may be briefly stated and they are : The two petitioners are transferees of certain immovable properties situated at Hassan and Sakleshpur. Their transferor, (one Sri M. P. Jayaram, was an assessee as Joint Hindu Family. In one case the property is a vacant land measuring 60' X 90' situated on the Bus-Stand road at Hassan. Another property is a site with shops, also at Hassan. Another property is also a site situated at Bangalore-Mangalore Road in Sakleshpur Town. The first mentioned property has been sold to the petitioner Smt. K. M...
Tag this Judgment!Deshanur Oil Mills and ors. Vs. Commercial Tax Officer, Circle Iii, Be ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-06-1981
Reported in: 1981(2)KarLJ52; [1982]49STC356(Kar)
ORDERChandrakantaraj URS, J.1. These three petitions are disposed of by this common order as a common question of law has been raised in all the petitions. Though the assesses-petitioners are different their common grievance is that the impugned notice at exhibit B in each of the petitions was illegal and without jurisdiction inasmuch as the same was issued beyond the period of limitation prescribed under section 25-A of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The said exhibit B is dated 26th March, 1976. 2. All the petitioners are groundnut oil manufacturers. They purchase groundnuts and decorticate and then sell the nuts without shells both in the State of Karnataka as well as outside. Each of the petitioners submitted his return for the assessment year 1964-65 and the respondent-Commercial Tax Officer (hereinafter referred to as 'the Commercial Tax Officer') at the relevant time assessed them giving exemption to the inter-State sales turnover of the petit...
Tag this Judgment!S. Govindaraju Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Karnataka-i
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-05-1981
Reported in: (1981)25CTR(Kar)340; [1982]138ITR495(KAR); [1982]138ITR495(Karn)
Chandrakantaraj Urs, J.1. The petitioner is an assessee under the I.T. Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). He filed a return of his income for the assessment year 1976-77 on February 23, 1978. The 2nd respondent, ITO, in concluding the assessment for the said assessment year, levied interest under sub-s. (8)(a) of s. 139 of the Act, as well as interest under sub-s. (1A) of s. 217 of the Act, in addition to issue of a notice to commence proceedings under s. 217(1)(a) and s. 273(c) of the Act, for filing belated return and concealment of income. 2. Aggrieved by the imposition of interest under s. 139(8)(a) and s. 217(1A) of the Act, the assesses-petitioner preferred two revision applications to the Commissioner, 1st respondent herein, inter alia, contending that the order was bad inasmuch as there was no proposition first to levy such interest; that there was no hearing given to the assesses-petitioner before the interest was levied, that the denial of a hearing to the asse...
Tag this Judgment!Muthaya Moily Vs. Dakshina Kannada
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-05-1981
Reported in: AIR1981Kant244; 1981(1)KarLJ521
ORDER1. The petitioner owns a lorry bearing No. MYG 6269. The registration certificate of the vehicle was suspended for three months by the Regional Transport Authority, Dakshina Kannada District (The R.T.O.) who also called upon the petitioner to pay tax in respect of the vehicle for the period from 1-10-1975 to 31-3-1976. The petitioner's appeal to the Deputy Commissioner for Transport against the said action was dismissed. Hence this writ petition.2. The registration certificate was suspended on the ground that the vehicle was found carrying without permit 90 quintals of rice with bogus registration No. MYG 6357. The Petitioner did not give explanation to the show cause notice issued against him. Perhaps, be was busy before the Criminal Court. He was also prosecuted for the same offence in C. C. No. 835 of 1975. But the Additional Munsiff and J. M. F. C., Coondapur, who tried the case, acquitted the petitioner for want of proof of commission of the offence.The acquittal was recorded...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »