Karnataka Court December 1990 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.
Mysore Construction Co. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-06-1990
Reported in: [1992]196ITR105(KAR); [1992]196ITR105(Karn)
K. Shivashankar Bhat, J.1. The following question of law is referred under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is justified in law in upholding the disallowance of the claim for investment allowance of Rs. 83,849 made by the Income-tax Officer under section 32A of the Act ?' 2. The question has already been answered by this court in I. T. R. C. Nos. 217 and 218 of 1985 (Shankaranarayana Construction Co. v. CIT : [1991]189ITR463(KAR) ), disposed of on November 8, 1990. Following the aforesaid decision, the question is answered in the negative and against the Revenue. ...
V. Maroli Vs. Archbishop of Bangalore
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-06-1990
Reported in: ILR1991KAR53; 1990(3)KarLJ379
ORDERRama Jois, Ag. C.J. 1. In the first Writ Petition, the petitioner has questioned the legality of the allotment of a premises in favour of the second respondent by the Rent and Accommodation Controller, Civil Area, Bangalore, and the order of the Deputy Commissioner, Bangalore District, dismissing his appeal against the order of the Rent Controller. The second Writ Petition is presented by the allottee - the second respondent in the first Writ Petition - challenging the validity of Sub-rule (1)(A)(10) of Rule 4 of the Karnataka Rent Control Rules, which requires the Rent Controller to give priority in the matter of allotment of non-residential buildings, the rent of which exceeds Rs. 500-00, in favour of the person who has secured the consent of the landlord.For the sake of convenience, in the course of our order, we would be referring to the parties as in the first Petition.2. Brief facts of the case, are these: The petitioner in W.P. 20391/1986 is a citizen of India. He secured E...
Shyam Sunder U. Nichani Vs. Asstt. Collector of C. Ex. and Customs
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-05-1990
Reported in: 1991(33)ECC246; 1991(56)ELT5(Kar)
1. The appellant herein filed writ petition No. 31525/1982 praying for quashing of the order Annexure-G, dated 24-7-1982 passed by the Assistant Collector of Central Excise withdrawing the classification list dated 26-11-1982 effective from 27-11-1981 approved by the department, and directing the appellant to submit a revised classification list for the relevant period without claiming full exemption under the Notification No. 80/80, dated 19-6-1980 as amended. The learned single Judge held that the appellant was not entitled to claim full exemption under the aforesaid notification and therefore the order Annexure-G was justified. The judgment and order of the learned single Judge is impugned in this appeal by the appellant. 2. The relevant facts of the case are not in dispute. The petitioner is a manufacturer of rubber products which admittedly is exigible to duty under Tariff Item No. 16A (i) of Schedule-I to the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 hereinafter referred to as the Act'....
Property and Finance Private Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-05-1990
Reported in: ILR1991KAR315
ORDERBalakrishna, J. 1. An action for Judicial Review of an administrative order is brought before this Court by victims of Indo Pak Conflict of 1965. The seizure of the immovable property in Karachi of M/s. Palace Hotel (Karachi) Limited by the Government of Pakistan fetched an ex gratia payment of Rs. 3,15,463-82 from the Government of India whereas the market value of the property of the relevant time amounted to Rs. 2,60,21,208/- as claimed by the petitioners. The petitioners are seeking a declaration that they are entitled to a sum of Rs. 29,60,961-20 and for a direction to the respondent for payment of the aforesaid sum together with interest at the rate of 18% per annum or at the rate to be fixed by this Court.2. The material facts culminating in this Writ Petition may be briefly set out as follows:-Hostilities between India and Pakistan commenced in 1965 and ended with an agreement signed between the two countries which has come to be known as Tashkent Agreement dated 10-1-1966...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›