Karnataka Court June 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.
Chief Commissioner (Administration) Vs. Sanjay Sales Syndicate
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-20-1991
Reported in: [1992]197ITR255(KAR); [1992]197ITR255(Karn)
K. Shivashankar Bhat, J.1. The question for our consideration referred under the provisions of the Income-tax Act, 1961 reads thus : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, while computing the income on accrual basis on the mercantile method of accounting in accordance with section 145, sales tax which was an accrued liability, not payable within the accounting year, could be added back under section 43B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?' 2. The question pertains to the assessment year 1984-85. The assessee is a dealer registered under the provisions of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act. Sale tax collected by the assessee in one month having regard to the provisions of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act and the Rules framed thereunder. According to the assessee, he has been maintaining the mercantile system of accounting. During the relevant previous year, a sum of Rs. 2,904 was collected by the assessee as sales tax and surcharge and this was during the last month of the previous ...
Rajata Trust Vs. Chief Commissioner of Income-tax and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-20-1991
Reported in: (1991)97CTR(Kar)97; ILR1991KAR2350; 1991(2)KarLJ612
S. Mohan, C.J. 1. The short facts leading to the appeal are as under : The appellant entered into an agreement with the third respondent for the purchase of an immovable property herein described as Mohan Buildings situated at Nos. 775 to 809, Old Kacheri Road, Chickpet, Bangalore. The agreement is dated November 28, 1990. The appellant, the transferee, and the third respondent, the transferor, jointly filed a statement in Form No. 37-I prescribed by the rules framed under the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'), with the appropriate authority on November 30, 1990. 2. The appropriate authority passed an order on January 24, 1991, under section 269UD(1) of the Act. We will now extract the relevant portions of the order : 'Thus, a significant point in the agreement is that the transferee agrees to purchase the property with the 46 existing tenants and that taking vacant possession is restricted only to the portion occupied by the transferor itself. On payment of t...
Regional Provident Fund Commissioner Vs. Management of Hotel Highway L ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-20-1991
Reported in: 1991(2)KarLJ296; (1999)IIILLJ243Kant
S. Mohan, C.J.1. The short question that arises for our consideration in this case is whether the trainees undergoing training with the Management of Hotel Highway Limited, Mysore, are employees within the meaning of Section 2(f) of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (for short 'the Act').2. The learned single Judge held, mainly relying on the decision in the Employees' State Insurance Corporation v. The tata Engineering and Locomotive Co. Ltd., (1976-I-LLJ-81), that the dominant object and intent to impart on the part of the employer and to accept on the part of the other person learning under certain agreed terms, is the criterion to decide whether one is employee or not. Though his attention was drawn to an unreported judgment of this Court in W.P. No. 4916/1974, delivered by JUSTICE K. JAGANNATHA shETTY, as he then was, he did not take note of the said decision. Therefore, he allowed the writ petition and quashed the demand by Regional Provident F...
Regional Provident Fund Commissioner Vs. Management of Hotel Highway L ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-20-1991
Reported in: ILR1991KAR2381
Mohan, C.J.1. The short question that arises for our consideration in this case is whether the trainees undergoing training with the Management of Hotel Highway Limited, Mysore, are employees within the meaning of Section 2(f) of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (for short 'the Act').2. The learned single Judge held, mainly relying on the Decision in THE EMPLOYEES' STATE INSURANCE CORPORATION AND ANR. v. THE TATA ENGINEERING & LOCOMOTIVE CO. LTD., AND ANR., : (1976)ILLJ81SC that the dominant object and intent to impart on the part of the employer and to accept on the part of the other person learning under certain agreed terms, is the criterion to decide whether one is employee or not. Though his attention was drawn to an unreported Judgment of this Court in W.P. No. 4916/1974, 2. DD 1-6-1976 - Tungabhadra Sugar Works v. Regional Provident Fund Commissioner delivered by Justice K. Jagannatha Shetty, as he then was, he did not take note of the said D...
Tejavva Vs. Veerabasappa Rudrappa Mareguddi
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-19-1991
Reported in: ILR1991KAR3257; 1991(2)KarLJ624
B. Jagannatha Hegde, J. 1. This Miscellaneous Second Appeal is filed against the order dated 5-9-1990 passed in R.A.84/85 on the file of the Additional Civil Judge, Bagalkot, allowing the appeal, setting aside the Judgment and Decree, passed by the Munsiff, Hungund in O.S. No. 41 /1981 dated 19-10-1985 and remanding the matter to the trial Court for disposing the case according to law. 2. The appellants filed a suit in O.S. No. 41/1981 before the Munsiff, Hungund for declaration of title and possession of the suit property against respondent 1 (a) and father of other respondents and another. The suit was decreed on 19-10-1985. The said order was challenged before the Civil Judge, Bagalkot in R.A.84/85 by the respondents. The learned Civil Judge allowed the appeal, set aside the Judgment and decree dated 19-10-1985 passed by the Munsiff, Hungund and remanded the entire suit to the trial Court for fresh disposal. The appellants who were the plaintiffs have challenged this order in this a...
Sri Banashankari Leasing Co. Ltd. and Another Vs. State of Karnataka a ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-18-1991
Reported in: [1992]194ITR650(KAR); [1992]194ITR650(Karn)
S. Mohan, C.J.1. The appeals arise out of the judgment of our learned brother, Justice Rajendra Babu, rendered in two Writ Petitions Nos. 17042 and 17043 of 1989 (see [1990] 182 ITR 8), wherein, though the petitioners were different in that the appellant in W. A. No. 2147 of 1989 was a leasing company, while the appellant, namely, in W. A. No. 2148 of 1989 was an automobile company, they challenged the constitutional validity of entry 19 of the Karnataka Tax on Professions, Trades, Callings and Employments Act, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), in so far as it purports to levy a flat rate of tax of Rs. 2,500 per annum on every company. The charging section under that Act is section 3. That says in sub-section (2) that any person exercising any profession or calling or engaged in trade-public or private-shall be liable to pay tax at the rate mentioned in the corresponding entry in the third column of the Schedule. It is under the Schedule that entry 19 provides a flat rate of...
i.K. Jagirdar Vs. State of Karnataka and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-17-1991
Reported in: AIR1992Kant175
ORDER1. The petitioner has filed this writ petition claiming to espouse the public interest. The petitioner contends that he is a tax payer; a journalist serving the cause of the public through journalism since last 30 years; he was a senior feature writer and investigative reporter for a leading Kannada daily newspaper 'Prajavani'; he is an income-tax assessee; a member of the Karnataka Working Journalist Association and was the President of the Press Club, Bangalore, for three years from 1986-88 and at present he is the editor of Kannada fortnightly 'Sanketa'. As such he claims to have the locus standi to maintain this writ petition.The 2nd respondent was the former President of India, getting a monthly pension from the Central Government. He has got a palatial building at Anantpur in Andhra Pradesh; his sons are well placed and he has got properties and income much above the average income of Indian citizens.The State of Karnataka is in a financially critical position since for last...
Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Smt. Veeramma and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-17-1991
Reported in: [1992]73CompCas431a(Kar)
M. Rama Jois, J.1. In this appeal presented under section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, the following important questions arise for consideration : '(1) Whether, in an appeal presented under section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, an appellant presenting the appeal ;is required to deposit Rs. 25,000 or 50 per cent. of the amount awarded by the Tribunal, whichever is less, only if directed by the High Court and (2) How should the deposit be made ?' Section 173 of the Act reads : '173. Appeals. - (1) Subject to the provisions of sub - section (2), any person aggrieved by an award of a Claims Tribunal may, within ninety days from the date of the award, prefer an appeal to the High Court : Provided that no appeal by the person who is required to pay any amount in terms of such award shall be entertained by the High Court unless he has deposited with it twenty - five thousand rupees or fifty per cent. of the amount so awarded, whichever is less, in the manner directed by the Hi...
Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd Vs. Smt. Veeramma and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-17-1991
Reported in: 1992ACJ239; [1993]76CompCas358(Kar); ILR1991KAR2669; 1991(2)KarLJ298
M. Rama Jois, J.1. In this appeal presented under section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, the following important questions arise for consideration : '(1) Whether, in an appeal presented under section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, an appellant presenting the appeal is required to deposit Rs. 25,000 or 50 per cent. of the amount awarded by the Tribunal, whichever less, only if directed by the High Court and (2) How should the deposit be made ?' 2. Section 173 of the Act reads : '173. Appeals. - (1) Subject to the provisions of sub-section (2), any person aggrieved by an award of a Claims Tribunal may, within ninety days from the date of the award, prefer an appeal to the High Court : Provided that no appeal by the person who is required to pay any amount in terms of such award shall be entertained by the High Court unless he has deposited with it twenty-five thousand rupees or fifty per cent. of the amount so awarded, whichever is less, in the manner directed by the High C...
i.K. Jagirdar Vs. State of Karnataka
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-17-1991
Reported in: ILR1991KAR2704
ORDERShivaraj Patil, J. 1. The Petitioner has filed this Writ Petition claiming to espouse the public interest. The Petitioner contends that he is a tax payer; a Journalist serving the cause of the public through journalism since last 30 years; he was a senior Feature Writer and Investigative Reporter for a leading Kannada daily newspaper 'Prajavani'; he is an income-tax assessee; a member of the Karnataka Working Journalist Association and was the President of the Press Club, Bangalore, for three years from 1986-88 and at present he is the Editor of Kannada fortnightly 'Sanketa'. As such he claims to have the locus standi to maintain this Writ Petition.The 2nd Respondent was the former President of India, getting a monthly pension from the Central Government. He has got a palatial building at Anantpur in Andhra Pradesh; his sons are well placed and he has got properties and income much above the average income of Indian citizens.The State of Karnataka is in a financially critical posi...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »