Skip to content

Karnataka Court August 1983 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.

Aug 02 1983

Commissioner of Income-tax, Karnataka-ii Vs. C. Chandrashekar

Court: Karnataka

Decided on: Aug-02-1983

Reported in: (1984)38CTR(Kar)246; [1984]145ITR429(KAR); [1984]145ITR429(Karn); [1984]16TAXMAN297(Kar)

1. The following question has been referred for the opinion of this court under s. 256(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961 ('the Act' called shortly). 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the exemption of capital gain contemplated by section 54(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, is available to an HUF also ?' 2. The facts behind the legal formulation are as follows : 3. The assesses-HUF had an old house. That house was sold and a new house was constructed within two years thereof. The assesses claimed exemption of capital gains amounting to Rs. 11,250 under s. 54(1) of the Act. The ITO found that the house which was sold was not used by the assesses or his parents for residence, but it was let out. He accordingly did not allow exemption under s. 54(1) of the Act. The assesses appealed to the AAC. It was urged in that appeal that the house which was sold was under the self-occupation of the assesses and not let out to any third ...


Aug 01 1983

Srikantaradhya Vs. Kamalamma and ors.

Court: Karnataka

Decided on: Aug-01-1983

Reported in: AIR1984Kant236

Sabhahit, J.1. This appeal by the husband is directed against the judgment and order dated 27-10-1977 made by the Second Addl. Civil Judge, Mysore in M. C. No. 8 of 1975 on his file, dismissing the petition of the husband for annulment of marriage with respondent- 1.2. The husband averred in his petition instituted under S. 12(1)(c) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, that he was married with the 1st respondent on 25-4-1974 at Chandrakavadi village, that he went to see the girl along with his friend and his wife, 20 days prior to the marriage and that both himself and his friend found two patches on the cheeks of the girl and on enquiry they learnt that they were patches of good luck which would disappear. They stayed for the night in the house of the bride and next morning the petitioner gave consent for the marriage, approving the girl hereafter the marriage took place on 25-4-1974. After the marriage he took the girt to his place Govinapura village, Kanakapura Taluk and they stayed the...


  • Next ›

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial