Karnataka Court January 1991 Judgments

Shreepad Vallabha Industries Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Tax ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: [1992]84STC351(Kar)

K. Shivashankar Bhat, J.1. The question involved in these writ petitions is identical, pertaining to the rate of sales tax leviable on the 'packing shooks' obtained out of timber logs. 2. For the sake of convenience, the facts in W.P. No. 18869 of 1990 are referred. The petitioner is a dealer registered under the provisions of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act (for short 'the Act'). He is engaged in the business of cut sizes timber. He purchases timber logs from registered dealers or from Forest Department. At the time of his purchase sales tax leviable on the timber logs will be collected by the concerned seller from the petitioner. These timber logs are cut into several sizes in the sawing machine. Thereafter petitioner manufactures packing shooks. According to the petitioner these packing shooks are nothing but cut size planks, which in turn are used in the manufacture of packing boxes. For the period 1st April, 1985 to 31st March, 1986, the petitioner had filed his taxable sales turnover...

Dharamendrappa Vs. State of Karnataka

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 1991CriLJ2262

Mirdhe, J.1. This Revision Petition is preferred by the petitioner against the order dated 4-10-1990 of the learned Sessions Judge, Hassan, in Special Case No.2/1988.2. The case was posted for hearing on admission on 2-1-1991. The learned Counsel for the petitioner remained absent. Hence the Court adjourned the case to today to hear the learned Counsel for the petitioner. The learned Counsel for the petitioner is absent even on this day. Hence the Court has no other alternative but to hear the learned Government Pleader and to peruse the records and to proceed to pass orders.3. The impugned order in this case is passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Hassan, holding that there is material to frame a charge accusation for contravention of Rule 8 of Cement Control Order, 1983, read with Sections 3 and 7 of the Essential Commodities Act and he proceeded to frame a charge-accusation against the accused.4. The main contention of the Revision-Petitioner is that the Police Officer had no autho...

Sri. H.N. Dharanendrappa Vs. State of Karnataka

Court: Karnataka

ORDER1. This revision petition is preferred by the petitioner against the order dated 4-10-1990 of the learned Sessions Judge, Hassan, in Special Case No. 2/1988. 2. The case was posted for hearing on admission on 2-1-1991 the learned counsel for the petitioner remained absent. Hence the Court adjourned the case to today to hear the learned counsel for the petitioner. The learned counsel for the petitioner is absent even on this day. Hence the Court has no other alternative but to hear the learned Government Pleader and to peruse the records and to proceed to pass orders. 3. The impugned order in this case is passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Hassan, holding that there is material to frame a charge accusation for contravention of R. 8 of Cement Control Order, 1983, read with Ss. 3 and 7 of the Essential Commodities Act and he proceeded to frame a charge-accusation against the accused. 4. The main contention of the revision-petitioner is that the Police Officer had no authority or p...

Honey Comb Estate, Mrs. Dorothy D'souza and Co., Hardwoni Estate, L.M. ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: (1992)101CTR(Kar)304; [1991]191ITR472(KAR); [1991]191ITR472(Karn)

Shivashankar Bhat, J.1. An identical question arise in all these writ petitions. For the sake of convenience, the facts in Writ Petition No. 10861 of 1987 are stated hereinafter. 2. The petitioner is an assessee under the Karnatake Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'), an owns a coffee estate in the State. The petitioner has been following the mercantile system of accounting and has been disclosing the coffee income on the basis of actual points declared by the Coffee Board. A return under the Act was filed adopting the said basis, valuing the coffee crops for the relevant season at Rs. 4 per point; this was the actual rate declared by the Coffee Board for the particular year. However, the respondent valued the coffee crops at Rs. 7 per point, stating that it was the average of the rates of the past 3 years; by this process, the respondent adopted the first proviso to rule 9 (c) of the Agricultural Income-tax Rules ('the Rules'). This method adopted ...

Mohini Bai M. Sarda Vs. First Income-tax Officer

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: [1991]190ITR541(KAR); [1991]190ITR541(Karn)

S.R. Rajasekhara Murthy, J.1. The petitioner is an income-tax assessee. For the assessment years 1981-82 and 1982-83, the petitioner filed her income-tax returns for the years ending March 30, 1982, and November 9, 1982, declaring total incomes of Rs. 15,360 and Rs. 13,760 respectively. The assessments were completed on November 29, 1982, and November 25, 1982, under section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act accepting the incomes declared.2. The petitioner had created a trust called 'Madanlal Sarda Family Trust' by a trust deed dated June 23, 1980, and had settled a sum of Rs. 10,000 under the trust and appointed three trustees to hold the said sum of Rs. 10,000 in trust for the benefit of benefit of eight minor grandchildren of the petitioner.3. The trustees carried on independent business utilising the corpus of Rs. 10,000 settled under the trust and filed returns of income for the assessment years 1981-82 and 1982-83 on February 24, 1982, and April 17, 1982, declaring total incomes of Rs...

Trishala Shoes (P) Ltd. Vs. Union of India

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 1991(34)ECC79; 1992LC105(Karnataka); 1992(57)ELT242(Kar); 1991(1)KarLJ294

ORDER1. The petitioner seeks the quashing of the order of second respondent as affirmed by respondents 2 and 3 and seeks further a writ of mandamus directing them to grant refund sought by the petitioner earlier from them. 2. The petitioner carries on business of manufacturing and sale of Poly Vinyl Chloride Footwear having the manufacturing unit at Rajajinagar, Bangalore. For this purpose the petitioner requires poly vinyl chloride resin. The petitioner used to import the same from foreign countries such as Singapore, Korea and U.S.A. 3. By a Notification dated 15th March, 1979 the Government of India exempted the whole of the basic duty on the import of this material. This Notification was in force upto 31st August, 1979. By another Notification of the said date the exemption was extended upto 31st March, 1980, which was again extended upto 31st March, 1981. Thus, according to the petitioner the whole of the import duty on the goods in question was exempted upto 31st March, 1981. Dur...

Rukmanlyamma Vs. A.M. Venkata Swamy

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 1992ACJ173; ILR1991KAR778; 1991(2)KarLJ53

Rama Jois, J. 1. In these three appeals presented under Section 110-D of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, the following common question of law arises for consideration:Whether the No Fault Liability in the case of death caused by a motor accident, is Rs. 15,000/- as fixed in Section 92A of the 1939 Act which was in force on the date of accident, which gave rise to the claim petitions out of which these appeals arise, or Rs. 25,000/-as fixed in Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, which came into force on 1-7-1989, which was in force on the date on which the Tribunal made the orders?2. These appeals have come up for orders and by consent of the learned Counsel appearing for the parties, they have been taken up for final hearing and are disposed of by this common order.3. Brief facts of the case are these:-(a) M.F.A. No. 1896/1990:- The accident which resulted in the death of the deceased took place on 25-5-1989. The claim petition was filed on 9-6-1989. In the claim petition, an in...

Corporation of the City of Belgaum Vs. Srikanth Kashinath Jitari

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR1991KAR645; 1991(1)KarLJ285

ORDERM. Ramakrishna, J. 1.The appellant in this Miscellaneous Second Appeal has called in question the legality and correctness of the Judgment and decree dated 17-6-1987 made by the Principal Civil Judge, Belgaum, in R.A.No. 1 of 1987 by which he reversed the Judgment and decree of the 1st Additional Munsiff, Belgaum, made in O.S.No. 401 of 1987 dismissing the suit as not maintainable.2. The learned Civil Judge declared by his order that the view taken by the learned Munsiff that the suit as brought was not maintainable in law, was incorrect and illegal. Accordingly, the learned Civil Judge allowed the appeal, set aside the Judgment and decree of the learned Munsiff holding that the suit as brought was maintainable and remanded the matter for consideration on the remaining issues. Hence, this second appeal.3. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are as follows:-Respondents 1 to 7 and the appellant herein are plaintiffs 1 to 7 and the defendant respectively. For the sake of convenienc...

Rukmaniyamma and anr. Vs. A.M. Venkata Swamy and anr.

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 1(1992)ACC636

Rama Jois, J.1. In these three appeals presented under Section 110-D of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, the following common question of law arises for consideration.Whether the No Fault Liability in the case of death caused by a motor accident, is Rs. 15,000/- as fixed in Section 92-A of the 1939 Act which was in force on the date of accident, which gave rise to the claim petitions out of which these appeals arise, or Rs. 25,000/- as fixed in Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, which came into force on 1.7.1989, which was in force on the date on which the Tribunal made the orders?2. These appeals have come up for orders and by consent of the learned Counsel appearing for the parties, they have been taken up for final hearing and are disposed of by this common order.3. Brief facts of the case are these:(a) M.F.A. No. 1896/1990: The accident which resulted in me death of the deceased took place on 25.5.1989. The claim petition was filed on 9.6.1989. In the claim petition, an inte...

Rukmaniyamma Vs. A.M. Venkata Swamy

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: II(1992)ACC309

Rama Jois, J. 1. In these three appeals presented under Section 110 -- D of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, the following common question of law arises for consideration:Whether the No Fault Liability in the case of death caused by a motor accident, is Rs. 15,000/- as fixed in Section 92A of the 1939 Act which was in force on the date of accident, which gave rise to the claim petitions out of which these appeals arise, or Rs. 25,000/- as fixed in Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, which came into force on 1-7-1989, which was in force on the date on which the Tribunal made the orders2. These appeals have come up for orders and by consent of the learned Counsel appearing for the parties, they have been taken up for final hearing and are disposed of by this common order.3. Brief facts of the case are these:-(a) M.F.A. No. 189611990:- The accident which resulted in the death of the deceased took place on 25-5-1989. The claim petition was filed on 9-6-1989. In the claim petition, an...