Karnataka Court March 1991 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.
Ritz Hotels (Mysore) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-11-1991
Reported in: (1992)108CTR(Kar)441; [1992]196ITR614(KAR); [1992]196ITR614(Karn)
K. Shivashankar Bhat, J. 1. The question referred for our consideration under the provisions of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act' for short), reads thus : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is correct in holding that there was no accrual of liability for payment of commission for the assessment year 1977-78 ?' 2. The assessment year in question is 1977-78. The accounting year is the calendar year. In September, 1976, the shareholding of the assessee company was altered to some extent by transfer of certain shares to one H. K. Basavaraj and another set of shares was transferred to a group called the Singh group. However, the business of the company continued as hitherto. 3. During the previous years, the assesses-company was paying commission to a Bombay company at the rate of 5% of its turnover as commission charges. The order of the Income-tax Officer shows that this commission was paid for the services rendered by the Bombay company to the ass...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Canara Bank
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-10-1991
Reported in: 1992(1)KarLJ245
K. Shivashankar Bhat, J.1. The Revenue seeks the following two questions to be referred by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal under the provisions of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act') : '(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is right in law in allowing the assessee's claim of bad and doubtful debts relating to advances made by the rural branches to the extent of Rs. 1,45,14,126 (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is right in law in confirming the orders of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) who deleted the addition of Rs. 12,16,33,177 being the interest accrued relatable to the period ended December 31, 1981, but becoming payable after December 31, 1981 ?' 2. The first question was held against the Revenue by the Tribunal on the ground that, actually, the axis bank had made a provision for the entire sum and that the sum did not exceed the ceiling...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Malaprabha Co-operative Sugar Factory
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-10-1991
Reported in: [1993]200ITR417(KAR); [1993]200ITR417(Karn)
1. The common question which is required to be answered by us in these reference under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, reads : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is justified in law in holding that the excess collection realised towards levy sugar price does not represent part of the turnover of the assessee and there is no justification for inclusion of those amounts in the gross total income of the assessee ?' 2. It was submitted by learned counsel that similar question being the subject-matter of reference in CIT v. Mysore Sugar Co. Ltd. : [1990]183ITR113(KAR) has been answered in the affirmative and against the Revenue. Hence, following the said decision, we answer the question referred for our decision in these references in the affirmative and against the Revenue. ...
Shah Harilal Bhikabhai and Sons Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-10-1991
Reported in: [1992]197ITR616(KAR); [1992]197ITR616(Karn)
K. Sivashankar Bhat, J. 1. The following question was referred for our consideration under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which reads as follows : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in holding that the provisions of section 154 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, are applicable ?' 2. In the course of the assessment proceedings, weighted deduction under section 35B was allowed to the petitioner. Subsequently, realising the pronouncement of the decision of this court which is now reported in the case of Ullal Narayana Malya v. CIT [1975] 1 Kar LJ 487, proceedings were taken under section 154 and this allowance was withdrawn. The assessee contended that this is not a matter falling under section 154 of the Act. The contention of the assessee was not accepted by the Appellate Tribunal. Hence, this reference at the instance of the assessee. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the assessee contended before us that the earlier order of assess...
M/S. Manakchand Motilal and Others Vs. State of Karnataka and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-07-1991
Reported in: AIR1992Kant123
ORDERRama Jois, J.1. In this batch of Writ petitions, the petitioners, who are carrying on their business as Pawn Brokers after having secured licences under the Karnataka Pawn Brokers Act, 1961 and persons who are doing business as Money Lenders having taken licences under the Karnataka Money Lenders Act, 1961 have questioned the constitutional validity of the Karnataka Pawn Brokers (Amendment) Act, 1985 and the Karnataka Money Lenders (Amendment) Act, 1985 on the ground that the provisions of the said Acts are violative of Articles 14 and 19 of the Constitution of India and they have also questioned the constitutional validity of Section 4(2)(c) and Section 23 (2) of the Karnataka Pawn Brokers Act, 1961 as violative of Articles 14 and 19 of the Constitution.2. The material facts necessary for the disposal of these cases are these :-- With the object of making better provisions for theregulation and control of transactions of money lending in the State, the Legislature enacted the Kar...
Pobathi Agencies Vs. State of Karnataka
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-07-1991
Reported in: [1991]70CompCas280(Kar); 1991CriLJ2529
M.M. Mirdhe, J.1. This petition is filed under section 397, read with section 401, Criminal Procedure Code, by the petitioner against the order dated February 18, 1991, of the Sixth Additional C.M.M. Bangalore, in P. R. of Probathi Agencies v. G. N. Jayakumar. 2. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader and perused the records of the case. 3. This petition is admitted. 4. With the consent of learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader, I have heard this case on merits today. 5. The petitioner filed a complaint under section 200, Criminal Procedure Code, against one G. N. Jayakumar alleging that the said accused maintained his business transaction with the complainant and, during the course of his business, issued a cheque for Rs. 8,300 drawn on the State Bank of Mysore, Ammasandra Branch, towards balance of purchase of hathi pipes and the cheque was presented by the complainant for collection through his banker, Vijaya...
M/S Pobathi Agencies Vs. thee State of Karnataka
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-07-1991
Reported in: [1992]73CompCas431(Kar)
ORDER1. This petition is filed under section 397 read with S. 401, Cr.P.C. by the petitioner against the order dated 18-2-1991 of the VI Additional C.M.M. Bangalore, in P.C.R. of M/s. Probathi Agencies V.G.N. Jayakumar. 2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader and perused the records of the case. 3. This petition is admitted. 4. With the consent of the learned counsel for the Petitioner and the learned Government Pleader, I have heard this case on merits today. 5. The petitioner filed a complaint under S. 200, Cr.P.C. against one G. N. Jayakumar alleging that the said accused maintained his business transaction with the complainant and during the course of his business issued cheque for Rs. 8,300/- drawn on State Bank of Mysore, Ammasandra Branch, towards balance of purchase of Hathi Pipes and the cheque was presented by the complainant for collection through his banker Vijaya Bank. N.R. Road, Bangalore. But it was not honoured and again...
New Swastik Flour Mill and Another Vs. State of Karnataka and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-07-1991
Reported in: ILR1991KAR1393
M.M. Mirdhe, J. 1. These writ petitions are filed under article 226 of the Constitution challenging the validity of item 138 of the Second Schedule [presently item No. 8(iii) of Part C of the Second Schedule] to the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957 ('the State Act' for short), which authorises the levy of tax under the Act on atta, maida and soji produced out of wheat, which is a declared goods under section 14 of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 ('the Central Act' for short), on the ground that it is inconsistent with section 15 of the Central Act, and to issue a writ of certiorari quashing the assessment orders under which tax has been levied on these items under the State Act. 2. The facts of the case, are as follows : The petitioners are dealers registered under the State Act, engaged in the manufacture of wheat products. They purchase wheat either within the State of Karnataka or in the course of inter-State trade or commerce, paying tax under section 5(4) of the State Act read with e...
Manakchand Motilal Vs. State of Karnataka
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-07-1991
Reported in: ILR1991KAR1928; 1992(1)KarLJ1
Rama Jois, J.1. In this batch of Writ Petition's, the petitioners, who are carrying on their business as Pawn Brokers after having secured licences under the Karnataka Pawn Brokers Act. 1961 and persons who are doing business as Money Lenders having taken licences under the Karnataka Money Lenders Act, 1961 have questioned the constitutional validity of the Karnataka Pawn Brokers (Amendment) Act, 1985 and the Karnataka Money Lenders (Amendment) Act, 1985 on the ground that the provisions of the said Acts are violative of Articles 14 and 19 of the Constitution of India and they have also questioned the Constitutional validity of Section 4(2)(c) and Section 23(2) of the Karnataka Pawn Brokers Act, 1961 as volatile of Articles 14 and 19 of the Constitution.2. The material facts necessary for the disposal of these cases are these:- With the object of making better provisions for the regulation and control of transactions of money lending in the State, the Legislature enacted the Karnataka ...
Muniveerappa Vs. State of Karnataka
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-07-1991
Reported in: 1991(2)KarLJ356
ORDERK.A. Swami, J.1. In this Petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution, the petitioner has sought for quashing the Notification bearing No. A6HR.S.LAO.(S) 201/82-83 dated 15-7-1982 published in the Official Gazette of 26-8-1982 issued under Sub-sections (1) and (3) of Section 17 of the Bangalore Development Authority Act, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') notifying that the lands stated in the schedule to the Notification are proposed for acquisition for the purpose of Nagarabhavi Layout. The petitioner has also sought for quashing the Notification bearing No. HUD 249 MNX 85 dated 16-8-1985 published in the Official Gazette of 7-11-1985 issued under Section 19(1) of the Act.2. Under the aforesaid Notifications the lands in question bearing S.No. 103 measuring 4 acres 13 guntas of Nagarabhavi Village, Yeshwanthpur Hobli, Bangalore North Taluk, along with several other lands are acquired for the aforesaid purpose. The petitioner claims to be the owner of the land...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »