Karnataka Court October 1992 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.
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Distillers Company (P) Ltd.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-22-1992
Reported in: [1993]199ITR34(KAR); [1993]199ITR34(Karn); 1993(37)KarLJ353
K. Shivashankar Bhat, J.1. In all these three reference, an identical question has been referred for our consideration under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act' for short), which reads as follows :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the explanation by the assessee that dividends were not declared in view of the expansion programme of the company, was not available to the assessee as a defence against application of section 104(1) in view of section 107A, Income-tax Act ?' 2. The assessment years are 1981-82, 1982-83 and 1983-84.3. The assessee which is a company has not declared any dividend during the relevant under section 104 of the Act though it had distributable income. The assessee stated that the income was not distributed, having regard to the expansion programme of the company to set up a distillery plant at Shimoga. However, the company had not applied under section 107A of the Act to the Board. Instead, it sought to explain the reas...
Karnataka State Forest Industries Corporation Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-22-1992
Reported in: [1993]201ITR674(KAR); [1993]201ITR674(Karn); 1993(37)KarLJ133
K. Jagannatha Shetty, J.1. In this reference under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following question of law for the opinion of this court : 'Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in upholding the addition towards valuation of closing stock or account of change of method adopted by the assessee ?' 2. The material facts giving rise to this reference briefly are as follows The assessee is a company engaged in the business of developing and manufacturing forest products for sale. For the assessment year 1979-80 the assessee changed the method of accounting in relation to the valuation of closing stock. A claim was made before the assessing authority to say that the change was made for a bona fide reason and that the closing stock figures should be one as determined by the assessee for the purpose of income-tax assessment. The Income-tax Officer reject...
Veeneer Mills Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-22-1992
Reported in: [1993]201ITR764(KAR); [1993]201ITR764(Karn); 1993(37)KarLJ145
K. Shivashankar Bhat, J.1. In respect of there assessment 1981-82, 1982-83 and 1983-84, the following question has been referred under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the lorries owned by the assessee would not fall under item III-E (1A) of part I of Appendix I, to be entitled to depreciation at 40 per cent. ?' 2. The finding is that the assessee is a manufacture of plywood. To transport the timber which is the raw material in the manufacture of plywood, the assessee used its own lorries. The dominant purpose of these lorries was the transportation of the material belonging to the assessee in connection with its manufacturing activity. However, on a few occasions, when the lorries were idle, they were given on hire. It is also the finding that the income earned by the assessee by hiring by hiring out the lorry is a negligible part of the assessee's income. 3. In the backgrou...
M.C. Lakshminarasappa and Another Vs. the Asst. Commissioner, Chikkaba ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-21-1992
Reported in: AIR1993Kant326
ORDER1. Sri M. Siddagangaiah, learned Government Pleader is directed to take notice for respondents.2. This Writ Petition is directed challenging the legality of the order dated 31-10-78 passed by the Assistant Commissioner, Chikkaballapur Sub-Division, Chikkaballapur, in No. HOA (R) TAL. 159/71-72. The petitioner has sought the following reliefs in the writ petition.Issue a Writ of Mandamus or order or direction or any other appropriate writ,directing the respondents 1 and 2 to regularise the sale transaction and further change the khatha in favour of the petitioners and pass such orders including the cost etc.3. The 1st petitioner purchased the land bearing Sy. No. 35 to an extent of 14 Yards East to West and 24 yards from North to South, situated at Malligurki village, Bagepalli Taluk, Kolar District, bounded on East by M. S. Narayanaswamy land, West of M. S. Narayanaswamy site, North and Sourth by 4th respondent. The 2nd petitioner has purchased the land, in land bearing Sy. No. 35...
Asian Wire Ropes Ltd. Vs. Delhi Special Police Establishment
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-21-1992
Reported in: ILR1993KAR186
ORDERShivappa, J. 1. These three Petitions are filed by M/S.Asian Wire Ropes Ltd., represented by Sri M.Janakiram. All these cases are clubbed and heard together and a common Order is passed. 2. The facts of the case in all the three Petitions and the offences alleged against the petitioner are stated hereunder: In Cr.P, 1440/92, the petitioner has sought for quashing the FIR in Crime No. RC. 19(A)/90 registered on 29.6.1990 under Sections 120-B IPC read with Sections 420 and 471 IPC and Sections 5(2) read with Section 5(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 (hereinafter called as the P.C.Act). In Cr.P. 1441/90, the petitioner is seeking for quashing the FIR in Crime No. 20(A)/90 registered on 29.6.1990 under Sections 120-B IPC read with Sections 420, 468 and 471 IPC and Sections 5(2) read with Section 5(1)(d) of the P.C.Act. In Cr.P. 1442/90 the petitioner is seeking for quashing the FIR in Crime No. 21(A)/90 registered on 29.6.1990 under Section 120-B IPC r/w. Sections 42...
State of Karnataka Vs. Abdul Rahaman Sheriff
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-20-1992
Reported in: ILR1992KAR3473; 1992(4)KarLJ469
K.A. Swami, Ag. C.J1. This Writ Appeal is preferred against the Order dated 12.6.1991 passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No. 5679 of 1991. The learned Single Judge has allowed the Writ Petition and quashed the orders dated 21.1.1991 (Annexure 'C') and 21.1.1991 (Annexure 'D') and has further directed the 3rd respondent in the Writ Petition to proceed to hold the elections from the stage it was interrupted by the impugned orders.1.1. There is a Wakf known as 'Jamia Masjid and Alhaj Mohammed, Rasool Shadi Mahal', J.C.Nagar, Bangalore. Election to the Managing Committee of the said Wakf was proposed to be held as per Annexure 'B' produced in the Writ Petition. Before the actual voting took place, respondent No. 1 issued an order dated 21.1.1991 (Annexure 'C'). As a consequence of the said order, respondent No. 3 also issued another order dated 21.1.1991 (Annexure 'D'). Consequently, the election was postponed.1.2. The learned Single Judge has held that Section 63 of the W...
Sri. Revanasiddappa and Others Vs. the State of Karnataka and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-19-1992
Reported in: AIR1993Kant304
1. This appeal is preferred against the Order dated 22-9-1992 passed in Writ Petition No. 18932 of 1992. The learned single Judge has rejected the writ petition. Hence, the petitioners have come up in appeal.2. In the writ petition, the petitioners sought for quashing the notice dated 18-6-1992 produced as Annexure C in the writ petition issued by respondent 3. They also sought for a declaration that the resolution dated 19-6-1990 passed by the City Municipal Council, Bijapur, produced as Annexure-A in the writ petition, is null and void. The notice (Annexure C) related to holding of elections to the Office of President and the Vice-President of the City Municipal Council, Bijapur. Annexure A, the resolution of the City Municipal Council, related to its consent for limiting the term of the President and the Vice-President for a period of two years from the date of assumption of the office. The learned single Judge has rejected the writ petition holding that there was a resolution passe...
Vidyaranya Vidya SamsThe Vs. State of Karnataka
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-19-1992
Reported in: ILR1992KAR3466; 1992(4)KarLJ464
K.A. Swami, Ag. C.J.1. This Appeal is preferred against the order dated 6.8.1992 passed in W.P.No. 23316/1992. The learned Single Judge has rejected the Writ Petition. Hence, the petitioner has come up in Appeal.2. In the Writ Petition, the petitioner appellant sought for quashing the order dated 21.7.1992 (Annexure-B) granting permission to respondent-3 to start a High School in Kannada Medium for the academic year 1992-93. The learned single Judge has rejected the Writ Petition on the ground that Rule 9 of the Grant-in-Aid Code is not enforceable. Therefore, it does not give any right to the petitioner to challenge the order granting permission to respondent-3 to start a High School in Kannada Medium for the academic year 1992-93 in Bommanahalli village, Chikkanayakanahalli Taluk.3. Sri A.V. Gangadharappa, learned Counsel for the appellant submits that the authority concerned is required to satisfy itself under Rule 9 of the Grant-in-Aid Code that whether there is any need to start a...
Revanasiddappa Vs. State of Karnataka
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-19-1992
Reported in: ILR1992KAR3469; 1992(4)KarLJ466
K.A. Swami, Ag. C.J.1. This Appeal is preferred against the order dated 22.9.1992 passed in Writ Petition No. 18932 of 1992. The learned Single Judge has rejected the Writ Petition. Hence, the petitioners have come up in Appeal.2. In the Writ Petition, the petitioners sought for quashing the notice dated 18.6.1992 produced as Annexure-C in the Writ Petition issued by responderit-3. They also sought for a declaration that the resolution dated 19.6.1990 passed by the City Municipal Council, Bijapur, produced as Annexure-A in the Writ Petition, is null and void. The notice (Annexure-C) related to holding of elections to the Office of the President and the Vice-president of the City Municipal Council, Bijapur. Annexure- A, the resolution of the City Municipal Council, related to its consent for limiting the term of the President and the Vice- President for a period of two years from the date of assumption of the office. The learned Single Judge has rejected the Writ Petition holding that t...
K.A. Abbas Vs. Sri Satyanarayana Rao and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-16-1992
Reported in: 1993CriLJ2948; ILR1992KAR3456
K.A. SWAMI, Actg. C.J.1. In this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution the petitioner has sought for issue of a writ in the nature of Habeas Corpus directing the respondents to set at liberty the following persons who are in the Judicial Custody under the direction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mysore as per his order dated 9-10-1992.1. K. Abubekar, S/o. Ramalaberi. 2. T. P. Pokar, S/o. Mammu. 3. M. P. Basheer, S/o. Khader. 4. Hussain Madan, S/o. Ahmad. 5. Ismail, S/o. Ibrahim. 6. Abbas, S/o. Ismail. 7. Supi. S/o. Ermu. 8. Shamusuddin, S/o. Umar.2. Of course, it may appear very incongruous to seek a writ of Habeas Corpus when the accused are in Judicial Custody because the writ of Habeas Corpus lies only if the custody or detention is illegal and unauthorised. However, it is necessary to state the facts and circumstances which are no more in dispute in order to determine whether the relief sought for by the petitioner should or should not be granted.3. The petitioner is th...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »