Karnataka Court September 1982 Judgments

i.N. Sundresh (Huf) Vs. Agricultural Income-tax Officer, I-circle, Chi ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: [1983]141ITR669(KAR); [1983]141ITR669(Karn); 1983(1)KarLJ132

Chandrakantharaj Urs, J. 1. This writ petition is disposed of at the stage of preliminary hearing after notice to the respondent. The counsel for parties have been heard. 2. The petitioner is a coffee planter and an assessee under the Karnataka Agrl. I.T. Act, 1957 (hereinafter) referred to as 'the Act'). In accordance with the return filed by him, he was assessed by the Agrl. ITO, respondent, in accordance with the order dated August 31, 1978. Thereafter, by a notice dated August 16, 1980, the respondent Agrl. ITO, I-circle, Chickmagalur called upon the petitioner to show cause why the order of assessment concluded on August 31, 1978, for the assessment years 1978-79 should not be rectified in respect of four matters. In the notice it was indicated that depreciation had not been calculated correctly, as a result of which a sum of Rs 8,157 came to be allowed on the declared value of the car at Rs. 32,614 at 25% of such value whereas the assessee petitioner was entitled to only 10% depr...

Workmen, Karnataka P.F. Employees Union Vs. Additional Industrial Trib ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR1983KAR157; 1983(1)KarLJ439; (1983)IILLJ108Kant

Malimath, J. 1. This appeal is by the Workmen represented by the General Secretary, Karnataka Provident Fund Employees' Union (hereinafter referred to as the 'Workmen') challenging the order made by the learned Single Judge in W.P. No. 18987 of 1980. 2. The facts relevant for the disposal of this case may briefly be stated as follows : The Government of Karnataka has made an order under S. 10, of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) referring certain disputes between the Provident Fund Organisation in the Karnataka Region represented by the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner (hereinafter referred to as the 'Management') the appellant-workmen, to the Addl. Industrial Tribunal, Bangalore in A.I.D. No. 3 of 1979. On behalf of the Management, it was contended before the Tribunal that the second party - Management (respondent 2 in this appeal) is not an industry as defined in S. 2(j) of the Act. It was further contended that the order of reference is with...

Tungabhadra Sugar Works (P) Limited Vs. Labour Court, Mangalore and an ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR1983KAR1; 1983(1)KarLJ21; (1983)ILLJ465Kant

Malimath, J. 1. This appeal is by the Management of Thungabhadra Sugar Works (P.) Limited, Harige, Shimoga, challenging the order made by the learned single Judge in Writ Petition No. 21798 of 1980. 2. The undisputed facts of the case may briefly be stated as follows : 3. The second respondent, Sri R. Srinivasa Murthy, was issued with a memo by the Management as per annexure-A to the effect that he is taken as a trainee in the factory for the crushing season 1971-72 on a monthly stipend of Rs. 100 and that he should report for training immediately. The second respondent having accepted the offer reported to the Management in accordance with the memo. After a lapse of some time, Srinivasa murthy wrote a letter as per annexure-C to the Management requesting that he be confirmed as Supervisor A2 Grade and given provident fund benefit. He has stated in that letter that he is a trainee engineer working since three years and two months; that he has been sincerely discharging his duties in En...

Nandi Steel Works Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commercial Tax Officer (Reco ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: [1984]57STC86(Kar)

ORDERChandrakantraj Urs, J.1. The petitioner is aggrieved by the assessment order which is at annexdure C made by the first respondent that came to be confirmed by the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes and a copy of that appellate order is at annexure D, the petitioner has not filed the second appeal provided for in the Karnataka Sales Tax Act to the Appellate Tribunal. In this writ petition the challenge made is to the recovery proceeding initiated as seen from annexure B. This cannot be permitted, as long as the assessment order has become conclusive. 2. For the above reason this writ petition is rejected. 3. On appeal, the case came up before the Division Bench : K. Srinivasan, for the appellant. S. Udayashankar, High Court Government Pleader, for the respondent No. 1. ...

Syed Fareed Sahib Vs. Foreign Exchange Regulation Appellate Board

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: [1984]56CompCas438(Kar); 1982(2)KarLJ591

Jagannatha Shetty, J.1. This appeal is directed against the order of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Appellate Board made in Appeal No. 478 of 1977, by which a penalty of Rs. 3,600 was imposed on the appellant. 2. In the appeal, the notice regarding admission was issued in October, 1979. It has taken almost three years to effect service on the respondents. Today it is listed again for admission, but we would like to dispose of the same on merits since both the parties are represented by counsel. 3. The facts are these : The appellant, Syed Fareed Sahib, has a son called Syed Ismail. he is pursuing his higher students in Canada. He had no many to go to Canada. So, he borrowed some amount from one money-lender, Shankarlal, at Bangarpet, and went to Canada. It appears that he is now employed there. He has sent two drafts, one for 250 U.S. Dollars and another for 385 U.S. Dollars to his father for onward transmission to Syed Meer. Both the drafts were drawn in the name of Syed Meer. This S...

Syed Fareed Sahib Vs. Foreign Exchange Regulation Appellate Board,

Court: Karnataka

Jagannatha Shetty, J.1. This appeal is directed against the order of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Appellate Board made in appeal No. 478/77 by which a penalty of Rs. 3,600/- was imposed on the appellant 2. In this appeal, the notice regarding admission was issued in October 1979. It has taken almost 3 years to effect service to the respondents. Today it is listed against for admission, but we would like to dispose of the same on the merits since both the parties are represented by counsel. 3. The facts are these. 4. The appellant Syed Fareed Sahib has a son called Syed Ismail. He is pursuing his higher-studies in Canada. He had no money to go to Canada. So, he borrowed some amount from one money-lender Shankarlal at Bangarpet and went to Canada. It appears that he is now employed also. He has sent two drafts - one for 250 U.S. Dollars and another for 385 U.S. Dollars to his father for onward transmission to Syed Meer. Both the drafts were drawn in the name of Syed Meer. This Syed Me...

Sree Nataraja Flour Mills Vs. Venkatarathnaiah

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR1986KAR382

ORDERPatil, J.1. In these two revisions filed under Section 50 of the Karnataka Rent Control Act, hereinafter referred to as the Act, the tenants have sought to challenge the legality and correctness of the orders of eviction dated 24-6-1981 and 3-10-1980 passed by the XI Additional Judge, Court of Small Causes, Bangalore City, and the III Additional Civil Judge, Bangalore City, in H.R.C. No. 23 of 1980 and H.R.C. No. 400 of 1975, respectively, on their file.2. Two non-residential shop premises bearing Nos. 57 and 58 situated in Old Taragupet, Bangalore, in occupation of the petitioners are the subject of dispute. They originally belonged to three sisters, namely, Girijamma, Renuka and Sarvamangala, daughters of Veeranna Gubbi, and they were let out together as one unit to Petitioner-1 herein Sree Nataraja Flour Mills and Perfumery Works, on a monthly rent of Rs. 170/-. Petitioner-2 M. A. Narayana Murthy, his father M. V. Aswathanarayana Shetty and B. K. Srinivasa Murthy (Respondent-6 ...

Krishnamurthy Shrinivasacharya Bhagawat Vs. the Assistant Commercial T ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: [1983]53STC129(Kar)

ORDERNesargi, J.1. The parties in these two petitions are common. These petitions have arisen out of the orders passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class (I Court), Gadag, in C. Mis. No. 72 of 1980 and C.C. No. 73 of 1980 on 5th February, 1981. 2. The facts are that the Assistant Commercial Tax Officer, Gadag, applied to the Magistrate, as per section 13 of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957 (to be hereinafter referred to as the 'Act), producing assessment orders and demand notices passed and issued against the petitioner, and praying that the amount stated therein be recovered as if it were a fine imposed by him in accordance with section 13(3)(b) of the Act. 3. The two cases cover two different periods of assessment. That is all the distinction between the two. 4. An objection was raised before the Magistrate, by way of an application in both the cases, that the amount could not be recovered as the petitioner runs a restaurant and renders service by supplying food and eatables to ...

Ninganna and ors. Vs. Narayana Gowda and ors.

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: AIR1983Kant116; 1983(1)KarLJ241

Rama Jois , J.1. This writ appeal is presented against the order made by the learned single Judge in W.P. No. 6242 of 1976 setting aside the order of Karnataka Appellate Tribunal in which it had directed the grant of occupancy rights in respect of lands in Sy. Nos. 17 and 32 of Bedarahalli village, Magadi Taluk, Bangalore District, under S.9 of the Mysore (Personal and Miscellaneous) Inams Abolition Act, 1954 ('the Act' for short) in favour of the father of the appellants and remitting the matter to the Special Deputy Commissioner for fresh disposal of the matter in accordance with law.2. The facts of the case, in brief, are as follows : (1) The appellant's father (hereinafter referred to as 'the inamdar') was an inamdar. He applied under S.9 of the Act for grant of occupancy rights in respect of lands in Sy. Nos. 17 and 33 of Bedarahalli village, Magadi Taluk, Bangalore District. The Special Deputy Commissioner, appointed as the competent authority under the Act, by his order dated 26...

Commissioner of Income-tax, Karnataka-i Vs. Shambulal Nathalal and Com ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: (1984)39CTR(Kar)195; [1984]145ITR329(KAR); [1984]145ITR329(Karn); [1985]23TAXMAN93(Kar)

Venkatachalaiah, J. 1. In this reference under s. 256(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore Bench, Bangalore, has referred the following question of law for the opinion of this court : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the assessment for the year 1974-75 could be made only in accordance with section 188 and the single assessment for the whole year was not valid ?' 2. The assessee, M/s. Shambulal Nathalal & Company, a firm of partners constituted under a deed of partnership dated July 17, 1950, consisted of 4 partners, viz., Rashiklal Nathalal, Jayantilal, Jawaharlal and Krishna Prabu. The instrument of partnership did not provide that the firm would continue after the death of any partner. On January 9, 1973, Rashiklal Nathalal, one of the partners, died, whereupon the accounts of the firm were made up to January 9, 1973, profit and loss account drawn up and the profits distributed to...