Karnataka Court February 2016 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.
Ryatar Sahakari Sakkare Karkhane Niyamit Vs. Asst. Commissioner of Inc ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-26-2016
These ITAs are filed u/sec.260a of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 praying to formulate the substantial question of law stated above, allow the appeal and set aside the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Panaji Bench-Goa dtd:04.08.2015 vide ITA Nos. 152 to 161/Pnj/2015 to the extent urged in this appeal and pass such other suitable orders as this Hon ble High Court deems fit to grant relief on the facts and circumstances of the case in the interest of justice and equity. This ITA is filed u/sec.260a of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 praying to formulate the substantial question of law stated above, allow the appeal and set aside the orders passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Panaji Bench in ITA No.152/Pnj/2015 dated:4.8.2015 and confirm the order of the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Bijapur. This ITA is filed u/sec.260a of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 praying to formulate the substantial question of law stated above, allow the appeal and set aside the orders passed b...
M/s. Hindustan Unilever Ltd., Bangalore Vs. The State of Karnataka, Ba ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-26-2016
(Prayer: These petitions are filed under Section 65(1) of KVAT Act, against the judgment and order dated 05.07.2013 passed in STA Nos. 2473 to 2484/2011 on the file of the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal, Bengaluru, partly allowing the appeals.) Jayant Patel, J. 1. All matters are simultaneously heard and being considered by the present order. We may record that the main lead matter is STRP No.1/2014, but as the respective assessment period are more than one, they are numbered as STRP Nos. 79-89/2015. Therefore, we would be referring to the facts of the main lead matter being STRP No.1/2014. 2. The present revision petitions have been preferred by the Assessee by raising the following substantial questions of law. (a) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the petitioner s case, was the Appellate Tribunal justified in law in holding that the petitioner could not compute the input tax credit on the basis of its books of account and in accordance with Section 11, 14 and 17 of the...
M/S. Hindustan Unilever Ltd Vs. The State of Karnataka
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-26-2016
1 R IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE26H DAY OF FEBRUARY2016PRESENT THE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL AND THE HONBLE MRS. JUSTICE S. SUJATHA STRP Nos.1/2014 & 79-89/2015 BETWEEN M/S. HINDUSTAN UNILEVER LTD., REPRESENTED BY ITS REGIONAL MANAGER-INDIRECT TAXATION SOUTH AND EAST SRI. Y.MANI AGED ABOUT53YEARS NO.30, INDUSTRIAL SUBURB STAGE II, YESHWANTHPUR BANGALORE-560 022. (BY SRI.R.V.PRASAD, ADVOCATE) AND THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED THROUGH THE COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES IN KARNATAKA VANIJYA THERIGE BHAVAN1T MAIN ROAD .PETITIONER2RESPONDENT GANDHINAGAR BANGALORE-560 009. (BY SRI. K.M.SHIVAYOGISWAMY, AGA) THESE PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER SECTION651) OF KVAT ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED0507.2013 PASSED IN STA NOS.2473 TO24842011 ON THE FILE OF THE KARNATAKA APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PARTLY ALLOWING THE APPEALS. THESE PETITIONS COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, JAYANT PATEL, J., MADE THE FOLLOWING: BENGALURU, ORDER All matters are simultaneously...
Ryatar Sahakari Sakkarre Karkhane Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of
Court: Karnataka Dharwad
Decided on: Feb-26-2016
:1. : IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE26H DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2016 PRESENT THE HONBLE MR.JUSTICE H.BILLAPPA AND THE HONBLE MR.JUSTICE P.S.DINESH KUMAR ITAs No.100111-100120/2015 c/w ITAs No.100012/2016, 100013/2016, 100014/2016, 100015/2016, 100016/2016 & 100017/2016 In ITAs No.100111-100120/2015: BETWEEN RYATAR SAHAKARI SAKKARE KARKHANE NIYAMIT, RANNA NAGAR TIMMAPUR - 587 122 MUDHOL TALUK BAGALKOT DISTRICT REPRESENTED BY MANAGING DIRECTOR - SRI ASHOK V MORAB ... APPELLANT (By Sri MANOJ D PUKALE, ADV., & Sri H.R.KAMBIYAVAR, ADV.,) AND1 ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX C-I PRESENT ADDRESS: DEVOOR BUILDING, BEHIND GODAVARI HOTEL ATHANI ROAD, BIJAPUR-586 101 2.3.4. :2. : JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX C-1 PRESENT ADDRESS: DEVOOR BUILDING, BEHIND GODAVARI HOTEL ATHANI ROAD, BIJAPUR-586 101 INCOME TAX OFFICER W-1 AAYAKAR BHAVAN, SECTOR NO.24 NAVANAGAR, BAGALKOT-587 103 INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS WARD FEROZ KHIMJIBHAI COMPLEX-I, OPP. CIVIL HOSPITAL Dr. AMBEDKAR ROAD ...
The Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. The Nagarbail Salt-Owners
Court: Karnataka Dharwad
Decided on: Feb-26-2016
R :1. : IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE26H DAY OF FEBRUARY2016PRESENT THE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE H.BILLAPPA AND THE HONBLE MR.JUSTICE P.S.DINESH KUMAR I.T.A.NO.100069/2015 BETWEEN1 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL REVENUE BUILDING ATTAVAR, MANGALURU THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-2,SANTERI KRUJAPA BUILDING HABBUWADA, KARWAR ... APPELANTS (BY SRI Y V RAVIRAJ, ADVOCATE) AND THE NAGARBAIL SALT-OWNERS CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED SANIKATTE, GOKARNA, KUMTA-581 326 PAN: AAAFT6229J (BY SRI ASHOK KULKARNI & SRI H R KAMBIYAVAR, ADVOCATES) ... RESPONDENT THIS ITA IS FILED U/S.260A OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT1961 PRAYING TO FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTION OF LAW STATED ABOVE AND TO ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PANAJI BENCH, PANAJI, IN ITA NO.252/PNJ/2014, DTD:23. 01.2015 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR200708 AND CONFIRM THE ORDER :2. : PASSED BY THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, SANTERI KRUJAPA BUILDING, HABBUWAD, KARWAR. ...
Nagaraj S/O: Shivayya Kattimani Vs. Syed Kareem Babu S/O: Syed Budden
Court: Karnataka Kalaburagi
Decided on: Feb-26-2016
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA R KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE26H DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2016 BEFORE: THE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE G. NARENDAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO.200709/2015 CRIMINAL PETITION NO.200710/2015 C/W IN CRIMINAL PETITION NO.200709/2015 BETWEEN: NAGARAJ S/O SHIVAYYA KATTIMANI AGE:59. YEARS, OCC: LEGAL PROFESSION R/O H.NO.4-1115, OLD BHOVI GALLI SARAF BAZAR, KALABURAGI. PETITIONER (BY SRI. NAGARAJ .S. KATTIMANI, PARTY-IN-PERSON) AND:1. SYED KAREEM BABU S/O SYED BUDDEN AGE: MAJOR, OCC: SAMAJ SEVAK R/O775 9TH BLOCK28H MAIN JAYANAGAR BANGALORE NOW R/O NO.33, 1ST FLOOR PATEHA APARTMENT NEAR TRENITY HEART HOSPITAL BASAVAN GUDI, BANGALORE.2. STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH ITS SPECIAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA KALABURABI BENCH. RESPONDENTS2(BY SRI. AVINASH.A. UPLOANKAR-ADV FOR R1; SRI. P.S. PATIL-HCGP FOR R2) * * * IN CRIMINAL PETITION NO.200710/2015 BETWEEN: NAGARAJ S/O SHIVAYYA KATTIMANI AGE:59. YEARS, OCC: LEGAL PROFESSION R/O H.NO.4-1115, OLD BHOVI GALLI SARAF BAZAR, KALA...
Commissioner of Income-tax, Belgaum Vs. Anil Kumar and Co.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-25-2016
Aravind Kumar, J. 1. These two appeals have been preferred by the revenue against the order passed by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bengaluru Bench in ITA No.986/Bang/2011 and ITA No.956/Bang/2011 dated 30.01.2014 whereunder appeal filed by the revenue is partly allowed and the appeal filed by the assessee came to be allowed. 2. Assessee is a partnership firm carrying on the business as cotton merchants and commission agents. For the Assessment year 2006-07 assessee filed its return of income on 24.10.2007 declaring the total income as Nil. On such return being selected for scrutiny assessment order came to be framed under section 143(3) on 29.12.2009 after issuing notice and hearing the assessee. The Assessing Officer found that assessee had shown sundry creditors (trade creditors) totaling to Rs.10,37, 33,867/- in the balance sheet and as such called upon assessee to file confirmation. On account of non-filing of such confirmation and on assessee's failure to furnish the postal addr...
Rita Thomas Vs. Thirupallamma
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-25-2016
N. Venugopala Gowda J. 1. Unsuccessful complainant is the appellant. The respondent having been acquitted by the learned Magistrate for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 18 81, this appeal was filed. 2. The dishonoured cheque, marked as Ex. P-1, was returned by the Bank with endorsements, as at Exs. P-2 and P-3, on the ground " not drawn on us After the cheque was returned for the aforesaid reason, demand notice vide Ex. P-4 was sent to the respondent and the payment having not been made, private complaint under Section 200, Cr. P.G, alleging commission of offence under Section 138 of N.I. Act was filed against the respondent. With reference to the sworn statement and the marked documents, cognizance of the offence under Section 138 of N.I. Act was taken and C.C. No. 27057/2012 was registered by the XIV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru. In response to the summons, the accused having appeared, denied the accusation. Hence, tri...
The Assistant Executive and Others Vs. G.N. Narayan
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-24-2016
(Prayer: This Appeal is filed under Section 4 of Karnataka High Court Act to set aside the order passed in the writ Petition No.3434/2009(L-TER) Dated 11.03.2010.) 1. The present appeal is directed against the Order dated 11.03.2010 passed by the learned Single Judge, in Writ Petition No.3434/2009 whereby the learned Single Judge for the reasons recorded in the order, has rejected the petition. 2. The short facts of the case appears to be that as per the respondent-workman, he was appointed as Literate Assistant on daily wage basis in the month of July 1984. As per the appellants, on 1.8.1985, the respondent-workman was not continued further in his employment. The dispute was raised before the Competent Authority and ultimately the said dispute was referred to the Labour Court for adjudication being Reference No.102/1994. The Labour Court ultimately passed the Award on 22.11.2006, directing for reinstatement with same status and with the further clarification that the order of reinstat...
N.E. Ponnappa and Others Vs. The State by Hullahalli Police, Bangalore
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-24-2016
(Prayer: This Crl.A. is filed under S.454 r/w 482 Cr.P.C., praying to 1) modify/set aside the impugned judgment of acquittal dated 31.08.2012 by the Hon'ble FTC-II, at Mysore in S.C.No.130/2011 is no far as ordering for confiscation of the M.O.No.14 -SBBL, Gun, M.O.15 SBBL Gun, M.O.16 - SBBL Gun, M.O.17 -Gun, M.O.18 -Gun and M.O. 26 to the state thereby ordering to release them in favour of the appellants respectively; 2) set aside the consequential order dated 20.05.2014 rejecting the claim of the appellants seeking release of the MO IN S.C.No.130/2011 Is no far as ordering for confiscation of the M.O.NO.14 SBBL, Gun, M.O.15, SBBL Gun, M.O.16, SBBL Gun, M.O.17, Gun, M.O.18 gun and M.O. 26.) 1. The appellants along with the others stood trial in S.C.No.130/2011, on the file of the Sessions Court at Mysuru, for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 144, 304 r/w 149 IPC and Sections 3, 25 and 30 of Arms Act. After holding trial, by a judgment dated 31.08.2012, the Presiding Officer...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »