Karnataka Court July 2008 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.
J.C. Industries Vs. State of Karnataka
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-02-2008
Reported in: (2009)26VST495(Karn)
ORDERV. Gopala Gowda, J.1. The correctness of the order passed by the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal dated September 19, 2006, in STA No. 1421 of 2004 rejecting the appeal in relation to the reassessment order passed under Section 12A of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act of 1957 (hereinafter in short called as, 'the Act') for the year 1996-97 is questioned in this revision urging various grounds.2. In this order, we will not advert to the facts as the same are referred to in the order passed by the Tribunal which is impugned in this revision petition.3. The ground of attack of the impugned order passed by the Tribunal is that, the levy of turnover tax by way of composition under Section 17(6) of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act (in short, 'the Act') is contrary to Clause (ii) of the aforesaid provision as there is no permission granted by the assessing officer to the petitioner-dealer to elect payment of tax on the total consideration for the works contract. The application was filed before the ass...
The Bank of Tokyo-mitsubishi Ltd. (Formerly the Bank of Tokya Ltd. and ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-02-2008
Reported in: 2008(6)AIRKarR111(DB)
ORDERB.V. Nagarathna, J.1. These writ petitions are filed challenging the common order dated 19.10.2005 passed by the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal-Channel ('DRAT', Channel for short) in Miscellaneous Appeal No. 82/2005 and Miscellaneous Appeal No. 83/2005 arising out of an Interim Application No. 4/2003 in Original Application No. 326/2000 and Original Application No. 327/2000, setting aside the order dated 14.5.2003 passed by the Debt Recovery Tribunal Bangalore ('DRT', for short) in Interim Application No. 4/2003 filed by the respondent herein in Original Application No. 326/2000 and Original Application No. 327/2000 pending before the Debt Recovery Tribunal and also challenging the common order dated 7.8.2006 passed by the DRAT in Review Petition No. 1/2006 and review Petition No. 2/2006 filed by the petitioner herein in the aforesaid Miscellaneous Appeal No. 82/2003 and Miscellaneous Appeal No. 83/2003 disposed of by DRAT, Chennai on 19.10.2005.2. the relevant facto of both the...
L.R. Gangadharappa Vs. the Assistant Commissioner and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-01-2008
Reported in: ILR2008KAR3508; 2009(1)KarLJ159
ORDERRam Mohan Reddy, J.1. The grant in favour of the petitioner, a site bearing No. 268/1 measuring 25 ft 30 ft, of Madure village, within the territorial jurisdiction of the then existing Mandal panchayat, by resolution dt. 6.10.1988, when called in question in an Appeal under Section 273 of the Karnataka Zilla Parishads, Taluk Panchayat Samithis, Mandal Panchayat & Nyaya Panchayaths Act, 1983, for short 'Zilla Parishad's Act, by the 3rd respondent, was allowed by order dt. 23.3.2001 Annexure-C of the Asst. Commissioner 1st respondent and the grant set-aside. Hence this writ petition.2. Learned Counsel for the petitioner contends that the appeal filed on 18.01.1991, under Section 273 of the Zilla Parishad's Act, against the resolution dtd.06.10.1988, not being within reasonable time, and without an application to condone the delay or an order to condone the delay, the appeal deserved to be dismissed. In addition, learned Counsel contends that the petitioner is in possession and occup...
H.E. Rajashekarappa Vs. State Public Information Officer and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-01-2008
Reported in: AIR2009Kant8; ILR2008KAR3646; 2008(6)KarLJ715; 2008(4)KCCR2404
ORDERK. Bhakthavatsala, J.1. The petitioner is before this Court praying for quashing the order dated 30.06.2006 at Annexure 'G'.2. The brief facts of the case leading to the filing of the writ petition may be stated as under:3. The Respondent No. 3 who is a retired Statistical Inspector made an application dated 17.03.2006 (Annexure-B) to the 1st Respondent to furnish copy of Assets and Liabilities statement of the petitioner for the period 2002-03, 2003-04 and 2004-05. The petitioner filed his objections to the application. The Respondent No. 1, considering the statement of objections filed by the petitioner, rejected the application by an order at Annexure 'E'. Feeling aggrieved by the order of the Respondent No. 1, the Respondent No. 3 filed an appeal under Section 19(8) of the Right to Information Act, 2005 before the Respondent No. 2/Appellate Authority. The respondent No. 2/Appellate Authority allowed the appeal and set aside the order of the Respondent No. 1 and directed the pe...
Sri Balaji Vs. the State of Karnataka and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-01-2008
Reported in: ILR2008KAR3697; 2009(1)KarLJ25; 2008(4)KCCR2497; 2008(6)AIRKarR168
ORDERH.N. Nagamohan Das, J.1. In this petition the petitioner has prayed for quashing the proceedings in C.C. No. 644/2005 pending on the file of Principal Civil Judge (Junior Division) and JMFC, Maddur.2. On 31.10.2002, on information, the first respondent police visited the primary health centre at Kesthur, Maddur taluk in Mandya district and recorded the statement of an injured person by name Ramesh and consequently registered a case in crime No. 108/2002 against eight accused including the petitioner herein for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 324 and 307 read with Section 149 IPC. The victim Ramesh succumbed to the injuries in the hospital and thereafter the second respondent being the wife of deceased lodged a complaint against the petitioner and seven others with the first respondent police. Consequent to this second FIR, the first respondent police included Section 302 IPC in the list of offences in crime No. 108/2002. After completion of the investigation,...
Baptist Mascarenhas and ors. Vs. Noel F.C. Pinto and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-01-2008
Reported in: ILR2008KAR4313; 2009(1)KarLJ341
V.G. Sabhahit, J.1. This appeal by the respondents 1(a) to (e) in the Writ petition is filed being aggrieved by the order dated 21.9.2004 wherein the learned Single Judge of this Court has allowed the writ petition and quashed the order passed by the Land Tribunal, Mangalore dated 6.10.1981 and remitted the matter to the Land Tribunal for fresh disposal in accordance with law after due notice to all the parties concerned.2. The writ petition was filed by the first respondent herein challenging the order passed by the Land Tribunal. Initially Writ Petition No. 5113/95 had been filed challenging the order passed by the Tribunal, after the establishment of the Land Reforms Appellate Authority the matter was transferred to Land Reforms Appellate Authority on 17.8.99 and thereafter, after the abolition of the Land Reforms Appellate Authority, CP was filed before this Court which came to be numbered as C.P. No. 7764/91 which was disposed of along with connected CPs by order dated 9.10.97. Th...
Commissioner of Income Tax and anr. Vs. T.S. Chandrashekar Through Lrs ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-01-2008
Reported in: (2009)221CTR(Kar)385
V. Gopala Gowda, J.1. These two appeals are filed by the Revenue questioning the correctness of the order passed by the Tribunal in MP No. 84/Bang/2001 in IT(SS)A No. 51/Bang/1997 for the block asst. yrs. 1985-86, 1994-95 and 1996-97 framing the substantial questions of law in these appeals and urging various grounds in support of question No. 1, praying to set aside the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter called as the Tribunal' in short) and remand the matter to the Tribunal to consider the correctness of the finding of the appellate authority on merits of the case in Appeal No. 69/2002 and in the connected appeal the order passed by the Tribunal in IT(SS)A No. 165/Bang/1997 regarding block period assessment order dt. 13th July, 2007 and praying to set aside the impugned judgment by allowing the appeals and remanding the matter to examine the concurrent finding of fact on merits in these matters and restore the order passed by the assessing authority.2. The substa...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›