Court : Karnataka
Reported in : (1999)154CTR(Kar)564; [1999]237ITR630(KAR); [1999]237ITR630(Karn)
..... . in the case of advertising and in any other case it is two per cent. explanation iii has been inserted by the finance act, 1995, with effect from july 1, 1995, and as per explanation iii for the purposes of section 194c the expression 'work' shall include :--(a) advertising ;(b) broadcasting and telecasting including production of programmes for such broadcasting or telecasting ;(c ..... do the work as a sub-contractor. sub-section (2) of section 194c also refers to the contract for carrying out the work undertaken by the contractor or for supplying wholly or partly any labour which the contractor has undertaken to supply.23. it is only by virtue of explanation iii added by the finance act, 1995, that advertising, broadcasting, telecasting, carriage of goods .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : (1986)56CTR(Kar)289; [1987]165ITR792(KAR); [1987]165ITR792(Karn)
..... . 3. with regard to questions nos. (4) and (5), we may set out some facts : the assessees had sold certain jewellery on august 8,1972. by the finance act, 1972, which was brought into force with effect from april 1, 1973, gold ornaments and jewellery were included in the definition of 'capital asset'. the assessees contended before the ..... assessees, invited our attention to a recent decision of the rajasthan high court in cit v. laxman singh , in support of his contention that the amendment, by the finance act, 1972, was not retrospective and, therefore, the capital gains which accrued on the sale of the jewellery before the amendment should not be bought to tax. it is ..... the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the tribunal is justified in upholding the assessment made by the income-tax officer on the assessees under section 168 of the income-tax act, 1961 ? (2) whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the tribunal is justified in holding that both the instalment of .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : 1986(7)ECC135; 1986(23)ELT337(Kar)
..... which have been subjected tovarious treatments, suchas coating, impregnating,corrugation, creping anddesign printing) notelsewhere specified------------------------------------------------------------------------11. there was further amendment to item no. 17 by the finance act of 1982. item 17 was amended with effect from 27-2-1982, and two specific entries were added. they are (3) and (4) which are ..... articles of paper and paper board.' therefore, developing his argument on the basis of the legislative intendment as reflected in the memoranda to the finance minister's speech, sri naganda's further submission is that carbon paper cannot be treated as coated paper and subjected to levy under 17(2 ..... intention of the amendment may be gathered from the memorandum of objects and reasons, which is a part of the amending bill to the finance minister's speech. the order of the appellate collector confirming the show cause notice and the provisional assessment and the demand made for the subsequent .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
..... /amenity on the employee. confer not tax issue a writ, order or direction more particularly in the nature of a writ of declaration to declare section 115 wa to wl of the income as introduced by the finance act, 2005, with effect from 01.04.2006 vide annexure-a as ultra vires article 14, 19 (1) (g) and 265 of the constitution of ..... value of certain fringe benefits. the provisions relating to levy of this tax are contained in chapter xii-h (sections 115w to 115wl) of the income-tax act, 1961. this circular seeks to provide a harmonious, purposive and contextual the provisions of the finance act, 2005 relating to the fbt so as to further the objective of this levy. interpretation of 2. objective in ..... of karnataka at bengaluru dated this the6h day of december , 2019 before the honble mr.justice p.b. bajanthri w.p. no.26037/2005 c/w w.p.no.4464/2007 and w.p.no.27087/2005(it) in w.p.no.26037/2005between :1. m/s t.t.k.prestige ltd., 2. a company incorporated under the companies .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka Dharwad
..... petitioner (by sri. g. shivadass, senior advocate for sri. praveen p. tarikar, advocate) and:1. . additional chief secretary and principal secretary to government finance department government of karnataka vidhana soudha bangalore-560 001. 2 . commissioner of commercial taxes vanijya therige karyalaya gandhinagar bangalore-560 009. 3 . joint commissioner of ..... petitioner (by sri. g. shivadass, senior advocate for sri. praveen p. tarikar, advocate) and:1. . additional chief secretary and principal secretary to government finance department government of karnataka2vidhana soudha bangalore-560 001. 2 . commissioner of commercial taxes vinijya therige karyalaya gandhinagar bangalore-560 009. 3 . joint commissioner of commerical ..... under which reassessment can be undertaken. section 6(2) of the kteg act requires valid grounds and strict adherence to the statutory limits. the petitioner s company s assessment for the year 2002-03, 2003-04, 2004-05, 2005-06, 2006-07, 2007-08 2008-09 and 2009-10 .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka Dharwad
..... petitioner (by sri. g. shivadass, senior advocate for sri. praveen p. tarikar, advocate) and:1. . additional chief secretary and principal secretary to government finance department government of karnataka vidhana soudha bangalore-560 001. 2 . commissioner of commercial taxes vanijya therige karyalaya gandhinagar bangalore-560 009. 3 . joint commissioner of ..... petitioner (by sri. g. shivadass, senior advocate for sri. praveen p. tarikar, advocate) and:1. . additional chief secretary and principal secretary to government finance department government of karnataka2vidhana soudha bangalore-560 001. 2 . commissioner of commercial taxes vinijya therige karyalaya gandhinagar bangalore-560 009. 3 . joint commissioner of commerical ..... under which reassessment can be undertaken. section 6(2) of the kteg act requires valid grounds and strict adherence to the statutory limits. the petitioner s company s assessment for the year 2002-03, 2003-04, 2004-05, 2005-06, 2006-07, 2007-08 2008-09 and 2009-10 .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka Dharwad
..... petitioner (by sri. g. shivadass, senior advocate for sri. praveen p. tarikar, advocate) and:1. . additional chief secretary and principal secretary to government finance department government of karnataka vidhana soudha bangalore-560 001. 2 . commissioner of commercial taxes vanijya therige karyalaya gandhinagar bangalore-560 009. 3 . joint commissioner of ..... petitioner (by sri. g. shivadass, senior advocate for sri. praveen p. tarikar, advocate) and:1. . additional chief secretary and principal secretary to government finance department government of karnataka2vidhana soudha bangalore-560 001. 2 . commissioner of commercial taxes vinijya therige karyalaya gandhinagar bangalore-560 009. 3 . joint commissioner of commerical ..... under which reassessment can be undertaken. section 6(2) of the kteg act requires valid grounds and strict adherence to the statutory limits. the petitioner s company s assessment for the year 2002-03, 2003-04, 2004-05, 2005-06, 2006-07, 2007-08 2008-09 and 2009-10 .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka Dharwad
..... petitioner (by sri. g. shivadass, senior advocate for sri. praveen p. tarikar, advocate) and:1. . additional chief secretary and principal secretary to government finance department government of karnataka vidhana soudha bangalore-560 001. 2 . commissioner of commercial taxes vanijya therige karyalaya gandhinagar bangalore-560 009. 3 . joint commissioner of ..... petitioner (by sri. g. shivadass, senior advocate for sri. praveen p. tarikar, advocate) and:1. . additional chief secretary and principal secretary to government finance department government of karnataka2vidhana soudha bangalore-560 001. 2 . commissioner of commercial taxes vinijya therige karyalaya gandhinagar bangalore-560 009. 3 . joint commissioner of commerical ..... under which reassessment can be undertaken. section 6(2) of the kteg act requires valid grounds and strict adherence to the statutory limits. the petitioner s company s assessment for the year 2002-03, 2003-04, 2004-05, 2005-06, 2006-07, 2007-08 2008-09 and 2009-10 .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
..... appearing for the appellant and mr.k.v.aravind, learned counsel appearing for the respondents.7. we may at the outset reproduce section 85 of the finance act, which is applicable to the present 6 matter. section 85 of the finance act provides for appeal to the commissioner of central excise (appeals) which reads as under: appeals to the commissioner of central excise ( ..... and ought to have examined the appeal on merits. it also appears that the attention of the learned single judge about the proviso to section 85(3) of the finance act, was not brought. further the sub-section (2) providing for beginning of the limitation from the date of receipt of the order was also not brought to the notice of ..... cause notice came to be issued calling upon the appellant to show cause as to why the service tax of rs.23,28,599/- for the period from april 2007 to march 2008 should not be demanded coupled with the interest and penalty. on 23.12.2011 the reply was filed. it appears that thereafter on 31.01. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
..... appearing for the appellant and mr.k.v. aravind, learned counsel appearing for the respondents. 7. we may at the outset reproduce section 85 of the finance act, which is applicable to the present matter. section 85 of the finance act provides for appeal to the commissioner of central excise (appeals) which reads as under: appeals to the commissioner of central excise (appeals). ..... ought to have examined the appeal on merits. it also appears that the attention of the learned single judge about the proviso to section 85(3) of the finance act, was not brought. further the sub-section (2) providing for beginning of the limitation from the date of receipt of the order was also not brought to the notice of ..... cause notice came to be issued calling upon the appellant to show cause as to why the service tax of rs.23,28,599/- for the period from april 2007 to march 2008 should not be demanded coupled with the interest and penalty. on 23.12.2011 the reply was filed. it appears that thereafter on 31.01 .....
Tag this Judgment!