Karnataka Court July 2009 Judgments

The Commissioner of Income Tax and the Income Tax Officer Vs. Shri J. ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR2009KAR3846

D.V. Shylendra Kumar, J.1. This appeal by the Revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [for short 'the Act'] is directed against the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in Appeal No. 798/Bang/2006 dated 29.8.2008 relating to the assessment year 1985-86 in respect of the respondent - assessee.2. The assessee had declared return of income for the assessment year in question. The assessing authority in terms of the assessment order dated 31.3.2004 [copy at Annexure-C] had rejected the return and had added certain amount representing the deposits in various branches of the Karnataka Bank in the name of third persons on the premise that the fixed deposit receipts were found in the possession of the assessee during the search operation and in the follow up action it was found that the application form for making the deposits with the bank had been in the handwriting of the very assessee and moreover the persons in whose names the deposits stood were not able to su...

A. Mallikarjunappa Vs. Standard Industrial Engineering Company and anr ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: [2009]151CompCas199(Kar)

D.V. Shylendra Kumar, J.1. This appeal under Section 483 of the Companies Act, 1956, is directed against the order dated August 27, 2008, passed by the learned single judge dismissing C. A. No. 697 of 2008 which was an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act and consequently dismissing the other two applications, viz., C. A. No. 645 of 2008 for recalling the order dated July 21, 2005 passed by the learned company judge allowing Company Petition No. 180 of 2001 (Standard Industrial Engineering Company v. Bellary Power (India) P. Ltd. [2006] 133 Comp Cas 787 (Kar)) and ordering the winding up of the respondent-company in the company petition filed under Rule 9 of the Rules and another C.A. No. 646 of 2008 seeking for stay of the orders sought to be recalled filed under Section 466 of the Companies Act.2. The appeal in substance is against the order passed by the learned company judge of this Court allowing the Company Petition No. 180 of 2001 in terms of the order dated Novembe...

Sri. Rama @ Ramaiah S/O Lakshmaiah Vs. the New India Assurance Company ...

Court: Karnataka

B. Sreenivase Gowda, J.1. This appeal is by the claimant challenging the order of the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Sub-Dvn. I at B'lore, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Commissioner' for short) only in so far as issue No. 3 holding that the claimant has failed to examine the doctor to ascertain the loss of earning capacity and in the absence of evidence of doctor, he cannot award compensation.2. For the sake of convenience the parties are hereinafter referred to as they are referred to in the claim petition before the Commissioner.3. Brief facts of the case are:On 19.2.2003 when the claimant was working as driver of the lorry bearing registration No. KA-17-8181 belonging to the 2nd respondent and insured with the 1st respondent, the lorry met with an accident and he sustained injuries. He filed a claim petition before the Commissioner seeking compensation which was resisted by the Insurance Company by filing statement of objections. Though the owner was served with the not...

T.P. Indrakumar Vs. Ito

Court: Karnataka

D.V. Shylendra Kumar, J.1. Appeal by an assessee, an individual, in respect of the assessment year 1998-99, who though had initially filed return claiming a loss of Rs. 1,17,480, on scrutiny by the assessing officer in respect of the particulars of the returns and later on the assessee volunteered to offer an additional income of Rs. 10 lakhs, had been assessed and on such premise had been asked to bear a tax liability of Rs. 2,23,856 on a net income of Rs. 8,29,520 with the addition of a sum of Rs. 13,428 as interest under Section 234A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, the Act) and a further sum of Rs. 92,877 towards interest under Section 234B, totally a sum of Rs. 3,30,161 apart from the prospects of facing liability under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act, and being unsuccessful in getting rid of this assessment order before the first appellate authority--the Commissioner (Appeals) and so also before the Tribunal.2. This Court while admitting the appeal had noticed the following q...

The Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Raja Magnetics Ltd.

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2010(250)ELT352(Kar)

D.V. Shylendra Kumar, J.1. The appeal by the Commissioner of Central Excise. Bangalore, under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 [for short the Act'] against the final order No. 1296 of 2008 of the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (for short 'CESTAT'] South Zonal Bench, Bangalore passed on 20.11.2008 in Appeal No. E/587/2008.2. Under the impugned order, the appellate tribunal had dismissed the appeal of the revenue and affirmed the order in Appeal No. 77 of 2008 passed by the first appellate authority - the Commissioner of Central Excise [Appeals] which had been passed on 28.4.2008.3. The appeal before the first appellate authority itself was by the assessee disputing the reversal of the central value added tax [for short 'CENVAT'] credit of duty to an extent of Rs. 68,052/- availed of by the assessee in respect of the following four invoices.--------------------------------------------------------------Date of issue IOC Invoice No. Cenvat creditof disallowedIn...

Government Tool Room and Training Centre Rep. by Senior Manager Vs. Sh ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR2009KAR3685; 2009(4)KCCR2867; 2009(6)AIRKarR115

ORDERHuluvadi G. Ramesh, J.1. This petition is by the Management of Government Tool Room and Training Center assailing the award dated 13-12-2008 passed by the Labour Court, Mysore in IID No. 209/1999 at Annexure-E and also (sic) for quashing the said award.2. One Kariyappa was initially appointed as casual part-time Gardener on hourly basis during November 1993. According to the Management itself, on 1-6-1994 he was once again appointed on temporary/daily wage basis for a period of six months without appointment order, but later they issued an appointment order and he continued so. Thereafter once again on 1-4-1997, he was appointed on contract basis for a period of six months on a consolidated salary of Rs. 1,200/- p.m. which was subsequently increased to Rs. 2,000/-.; According to the Management, from 1-9-1998 no extension was given to the workman and he also suffered injuries due to an accident from 1-10-1998 to 31-12-1998. Once again he was appointed on contract basis from 1-9-199...

Surana Industries Limited Rep. by Its Director, Krishna Udupa S/O Para ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR2009KAR2789:2009(4)KCCRSN220:2009(6)AIRKarR206:(D.B)

1. These writ petitions are filed by the petitioner seeking a writ of mandamus to direct the respondents to issue mining lease for the respective areas applied under six different applications, pursuant to the notification dated 15th March, 2003 issued under Rule 59(1) of the Mineral Concession Rules, 1960 (for short 'MC Rules') as referred to hereunder:-----------------------------------------------------------------------------Sl. No Date AML Location NotificationBlockand SI. No.-----------------------------------------------------------------------------1 3-5-2005 594 AML 05 Karthikeshwar Sl. No. 13/1B. No.-----------------------------------------------------------------------------2 3-5-2005 497 AML 05 Karthikeshwar Sl. No. 13/1B. No.-----------------------------------------------------------------------------3 8-9-2006 834 AML 06 Donimalai Sl. No. 12-----------------------------------------------------------------------------4 8-9-2006 835 AML 06 Donimalai Sl. No. 11--------------...

Miss. R. Kantha D/O. Sri. Doddarmaiah Reddy Represented by G.P.A. Hold ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: AIR2010Kant27; ILR2009KAR3699; 2009(6)KarLJ606; 2009(4)KCCRSN242; 2009AIRKarR218.

ORDERAnand Byrareddy, J.1. Thin writ petition is filed seeking to challenge the constitutional validity of the Proviso to Section 6(1)(c) of the Hindu Succession Amendment Act, 2005 (Act 39 of 2005).2. The background to the petition is ay follows:The petitioner aged about 36 is the unmarried daughter of One Doddanunaiah Reddy and they are Hindus. The lather, Duddarmaiah Reddy is alive. The petitioner has filed a civil suit in OS.S.3104/2007 before the City Civil Court, Bangalore. The suit is for partition and separate possession of joint family properties. The suit is pending as on dale. The plaintiff has called in question certain sale deeds executed in respect of the suit properties as not binding on her.Having regard to the Proviso to Section 6(1)(c) of the Hindu Succession Amendment Act under Act 39 of 2005, the trial court was inclined to dismiss the suit as not maintainable. It was at that stage that the present writ petition is filed questioning the constitutional validity of th...

The Commissioner of Income-tax and the Assistant Commissioner of Incom ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: (2009)226CTR(Kar)474

D.V. Shylendra Kumar, J.1. This is an appeal by the Revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, 'the Act') directed against the order of the Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore in ITA 581/Bang/2002 rendered on 1-10-2003.2. The appeal had been admitted for examination on the following questions of law:1. Whether the Colorable device adopted by the assessee in admitting two new partners namely Sri. M. Venkataramaiah and Smt. Sujatha venkataramaiah and permitting all the old partners to retire from the firm by receiving a consideration amount of Rs. 16,55,647/- from the old partners would amount to a transfer attracting the capital gains provision as per the Income Tax Act.?2. Whether the Tribunal was correct in relying on various judgments of the Apex Court and other Courts in arriving at the conclusion that there was no Transfer on receipt of consideration amount by the retiring partners from the incoming partners without examining and applying the amended pr...

Sobha Projects and Trade (P) Ltd., Registered Under the Companies Act ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2009(6)KarLJ161

ORDERAnand Byrareddy, J.1. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner.2. The petitioner in W.P. No. 9553/207 is a Software company and has the benefit of credit facilities with the Corporation Bank for several years and has the enhanced credit limit of Rs. 44.05 crore, which is called Package Credit Limit cum PCFC, overdraft facility, rupee advance against export and various types of term loans. The petitioner had offered title deeds of immovable property as collateral security for repayment of the loan amounts without reducing the terms of such transaction into the form of a document except handing over a letter to that effect, along with executing other loan documents, by paying a stamp duty of 0.5% on the loan amount. The petitioner had again approached the Bank for a loan of Rs. 70 crore in addition to the existing credit limit as on 1.6.2007. This having bean sanctioned by the Bank on certain terms and conditions as evidenced at Annexure-'A' to the writ petition and in furtheran...