Karnataka Court January 2004 Judgments
S. Jagnathan Vs. Asstt. Cit
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-08-2004
Reported in: [2004]135TAXMAN356(Kar)
ORDERThe first petitioner is the legal representative of late Sri A.S. Sengoda Gounder. Sri A.S. Sengoda Gounder died on 16-10-1997. He was the Managing Director of M/s. Sri Sampurna Laxmi Spinning Mills Ltd., at Erode. He was an assessee in Bangalore. He submitted income-tax returns year after year and was regular in the matter of payment. In the accounting year relevant to assessment year 1995-96, he received certain foreign exchange from certain persons who are non-resident Indians. He did not submit any information about the foreign exchange in his returns. A survey was conducted in the office and residential premises in the year 1996. According to the petitioner, nothing transpired from out of the survey. He, while filing returns indicated about the receipt of foreign exchange. Exemption was claimed in respect of NRI gifts. A search was carried out on 20-2-1997 at the office-cum-residential premises. Certain affidavits were seized in addition to certain xerox copies of the documen...
Tag this Judgment!Ganjam Nagappa and Son Trust Vs. Director of Income Tax
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-08-2004
Reported in: [2004]135TAXMAN321(Kar)
ORDERThe petitioner, Ganjam Nagappa & Son is challenging the order passed by R-I Director of Income Tax (Exemption) dated 29-5-2002, Annexure F.2. The petitioner is a Charitable Trust registered under section 12A of the Income Tax Act by the Commissioner of Income Tax, Karnataka. The Commissioner of Income Tax by an order dated 26-11-1999 renewed the recognition of Trust under section 80G of Income Tax Act, 1961 up to 31-3-2001. The Trust applied for renewal of recognition under section 80G(5) to the Director of Income Tax (Exemption) and the Director of Income Tax has rejected the renewal sought for by the petitioner. The same is challenged in this petition.3. Respondents have entered appearance. Sri Javali, learned counsel invites my attention to the material facts to contend that the Commissioner has committed an error in not noticing the facts and the law in the case on hand. He says that the object of the Trust does not in any way diluted by the petitioner warranting no renewal' o...
Tag this Judgment!Mangilal S. JaIn Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-07-2004
Reported in: (2004)187CTR(Kar)315; [2004]267ITR693(KAR); [2004]267ITR693(Karn)
ORDERD.V. SHYLENDRA KUMAR, J.1. Petitioner, an assessee under the IT Act, 1961 ('the Act' for short), sought to avail of the benefits of the Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme, 1998 ('the Scheme' for short), as formulated by Finance (No, 2) Act of 1998.2. The brief facts leading to the filing of the above petition which are not in dispute are that the assessee had invoked the provisions of the Scheme, that determination of the amount payable under Section 88 of the Scheme had been made and communicated to the assessee and that the assessee paid the amount six days beyond the permitted period of thirty days as is required under Sub-section (2) of Section 90 of the Scheme. The CIT, Hubli, the designated authority to pass orders and issue certificates as contemplated under Sub-section (2) of Section 90 of the Scheme having noticed that the payment had been made six days beyond the permitted time of thirty days, having declined to issue the certificate contemplated under Sub-section (2) of Section ...
Tag this Judgment!Devindrappa and anr. Vs. State of Karnataka
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-07-2004
Reported in: 2004CriLJ1506; ILR2004KAR909; 2004(2)KarLJ291
ORDERManjula Chellur, J.1. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioners and the learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent-State and perused the records.2. These two petitioners are accused before the Trial Court for offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 324, 307 and 302 read with Section 149 of the 1PC. The petitioners had filed bail application under Section 439 of the Cr. P.C. before the I Additional Sessions Court, Bangalore which was rejected on 6-8-2003. Therefore, they have come up before this Court under Section 439 of the Cr. P.C. for grant of bail.3. The petitioners are accused 1 and 5. They have sought for bail on two grounds; one on the question of law and the other on merits.4. Sri Ravi B. Naik, learned Counsel for the petitioners contended that on 6-2-2003, the petitioners were arrested and produced before Judicial Magistrate First Class and since then, they are in judicial custody. The charge-sheet came to be filed on 10-6-2003 which was beyond...
Tag this Judgment!In Re: Chembra Orchard Produce Ltd.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-07-2004
Reported in: [2004]120CompCas1(Kar); (2004)2CompLJ551(Karn); 2004(4)KarLJ83
N. KUMAR J.1. The six companies have presented these company applications under Sections 391 to 394 of the Companies Act, 1956, seeking appropriate directions for convening of the meetings of the shareholders and creditors of the respective companies and for dispensation with the holding of such meetings. The office has raised objection regarding maintainability of a single/common application by six companies which reads as under :As per Section 391(1)(b)... 'on the application of the company or of any creditor or member of the company', a single application with separate number is not maintainable in respect of six companies.2. In reply to the said office objections, learned counsel for the applicants requested the office to place the matter before the court to hear regarding the office objections. Accordingly, the matter was placed before the court. As the objection raised by the office was purely a question of law regarding the maintainability of a common application by several comp...
Tag this Judgment!State by Ulsoorgate Police Station Vs. B. Govindaraju
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-06-2004
Reported in: 2004(3)KarLJ22
1. The State of Karnataka has assailed the acquittal of the respondent-accused through the present appeal. According to the prosecution, the accused was the honorary Secretary of the Bangalore City Silk Handlooms Co-operative Weavers and Production Co-operative Society, Appajirao Lane, Bangalore, during the period 1-7-1981 to 15-4-1982. It is alleged that there was a deficit of plain silk and weft silk to the tune of Rs. 12,770.20 ps. The auditor who is P.W. 3 in his audit report held the accused who was the honorary Secretary liable for this deficit and recorded the conclusion that he was responsible for the misappropriation of the goods or the proceeds thereof. The Society was superseded and one Shankar Narayan was appointed as Administrator of the Society. He in turn, on the basis of the audit report which had been submitted to the Assistant Registrar of Co-operative Societies accorded sanction and authorised P.W. 7 to file a complaint against the accused. On the basis of this compl...
Tag this Judgment!Ajith Singh and ors. Vs. General Manager, Mysore Telecom District and ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-06-2004
Reported in: AIR2004Kant203; ILR2004KAR1043; 2004(4)KarLJ70
ORDERH. Rangavittalachar, J.1. Writ petitioners are the sons of one Bindar Singh who was a subscriber to the telephone No. 497877. The said telephone was disconnected from service on 16-2-1999 for non-payment of telephone charges. The respondents have issued notice to the petitioners dated 12-1-2001-annexure A demanding payment of a sum of Rs. 31,467/- due by Bindar Singh in respect of the disconnected telephone No. 497877 failing which they have threatened to take action. This notice is questioned in these petitions mainly on the ground that having regard to Rule 443 of the Indian Telegraph Rules, 1951, no such power is available to the respondents.2. The defence of the Department before this Court is, though petitioners were not the subscribers of the disconnected telephone, since they happen to be the sons of the subscriber - Bindar Singh and are also residing in the same house, they should be made liable to pay.3. Sri Aravind Kumar, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents cont...
Tag this Judgment!Vittal Poojary Vs. S.J. Yatish and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-06-2004
Reported in: II(2005)ACC858; 2004ACJ1700; ILR2004KAR2777
Tirath S. Thakur, J1. Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Udupi, has allowed MVC.751/ 92 in part and awarded a sum of Rs. 2, 11, 578/- with interest at the rate of 6% P.A. towards compensation for the injuries sustained by the claimant in a road accident. The claimant has appealed to this Court for a suitable enhancement of the said amount.2. The claimant was on 21.8.91 driving a lorry from Udupi on his way to Belthangady. When he reached a place near Udyavara forest gate, a tanker bearing registration No. KA 14-2070 coming from Katapady side dashed against the lorry, in the process causing injuries to the claimant. The injured was removed to the KMC Hospital at Manipal where he remained under treatment for a few months. In due course, he filed MVC. 751/92 before the Tribunal for payment of compensation. His case in the claim petition was that the accident in question had taken place due entirely to the rash and negligent driving of the tanker by its driver, thereby entitling him to payme...
Tag this Judgment!Syed Enayathulla Vs. State of Karnataka and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-06-2004
Reported in: AIR2004Kant295; 2004(4)KarLJ585
ORDERD.V. Shylendra Kumar, J.1. Petitioner claims that he is the Mutavalli of the Hazrath Hub-Ali Shah Makan at Kolar. It is the claim of the petitioner that he has been an hereditary Mutawalli of this Dargah. It appears that he was in fact appointed as Mutawalli as per Order No. KTW/M-1/23-KLR-84-85, Bangalore, dated 9th August, 1990 issued by the Karnataka Board of Wakfs, Bangalore (copy at Annexure-A). Petitioner was required to function under the general super -vision and control of the District Wakf Committee, Kolar.2. The District Wakf Committee for the district of Kolar within which the Hazrath Hub-Ali Shah Dargah is located is also constituted by the Karnataka Wakf Board.3. It is the claim of the petitioner that the petitioner had brought to the notice of Wakf Board about certain undesirable activities on the part of members of the District Wakf Committee particularly in the matter of construction and leasing of some 19 shops and also in the matter of collection of rent and oth...
Tag this Judgment!Syed Enayathulla Vs. State of Karnataka, by Secretary, Revenue Departm ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-06-2004
Reported in: ILR2004KAR2882
ORDERD.V. Shylendra Kumar, J.1. Petitioner claims that he is the Mutavalli of the Hazrath Hub-Ali Shah Makan at Kolar. It is the claim of the petitioner that he has been an hereditary Mutawalli of this Darga. It appears that he was in fact appointed as Mutawalli as per Order No. KTW/M-1/23-KLR-84-85, Bangalore dated 9th August, 1990 issued by the Karnataka Board of Wakfs, Bangalore (copy at Annexure A). Petitioner was required to function under the general supervision and control of the District Wakf Committee, Kolar. 2. The district Wakf committee for the district of Kolar within which the Hazarath Hub-Ali shah Darga is located is also constituted by the Karnataka Wakf Board.3. It is the claim of the petitioner that the petitioner had brought to the notice of Wakf Board about certain undesirable activities on the part of members of the District Wakf Committee particularly in the matter of construction and leasing of some 19 shops and also in the matter of collection of rent and other ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »