Court : Karnataka
Reported in : (2005)198CTR(Kar)209; ILR2005KAR5906; [2005]279ITR402(KAR); [2005]279ITR402(Karn)
H.L. Dattu, J.1. Since the issues involved in these two appeals are inter-related, they are heard together and disposed of by this common judgment.2. The facts in IT Appeal No. 189/2005 are as under:The assessee was an employee of Canara Bank, which is a nationalised bank. The bank had floated a scheme called Canara Bank Employees Special Voluntary Retirement Scheme ('Voluntary Retirement Scheme' for short). The objective of the scheme is to have an ideal manpower for the bank and to have optimum human resources in keeping with the business strategies, skill profile towards achieving a balanced age profile and meeting the latest requirements of the bank. The scheme, apart from others, provides eligibility criteria, benefits available under the scheme, and other general conditions. The scheme is available to all permanent workmen/officer employees of the bank, provided they have completed fifteen (15) years of actual service or forty (40) years of age and the eligibility to be reckoned ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : ILR1991KAR352; 1991(1)KarLJ240
ORDERBalakrishna, J. 1. The petitioners in these cases have sought for a Mandamus directing respondent-1 Bangalore Development Authority (B.D.A) to refund to the petitioners all the amounts illegally collected by them by way of taxes, cesses, fee etc., relating to the vacant lands and buildings and also for a direction to the B.D.A. to stop collection of taxes, cesses, fee etc., on such vacant land and buildings. The petitioners have also sought for additional reliefs in the nature of a declaration that the B.D.A. has no Authority of Law conferred under the Bangalore Development Authority Act, 1976 ('the Act' for short) to levy, assess or recover property tax and other taxes from the concerned members of the public and For a , declaration that Section 29 of the Act is ultra-vires, unconstitutional and void and for a declaration that Section 29 of the Act cannot be enforced by the B.D.A. for the purpose of levy, assessment, imposition and recovery of property tax.2. All the 17 petitione...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
..... services received by the appellant in the capacity of employer for providing food and beverages in the canteen maintained and run in the factory as per the mandate of section 46 of the factories act, 1948 would be eligible for cenvat credit and it would be within scope of input services as per section 37(2)(xviaa) of the central excise act, 1944 read with section 94(2) of finance act, 1994?. 8 13. heard the learned counsel for the parties at length and perused the record.14. in the present case the undisputed facts reveal that the ..... rules. the appellant also reversed under protest the said credit availed on 14.3.2013 on account of certain objections raised by the department in respect of entitlement of credit.8. the department issued a show cause notice on 23.4.2012, wherein it was alleged that outdoor catering services were not eligible input services being excluded vide rule 2(l)(c) of the cenvat credit rules and accordingly, the show cause notice proposed to demand the credit with .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : [1955]27ITR549(KAR); [1955]27ITR549(Karn)
Medapa, C.J. 1. The petitioners in these four petitions pray under the provisions of article 226 of the Constitution for the issue of a writ of prohibition against the respondents from proceeding with the enquiry pursuant to the notice under section 34 of the Mysore Income-tax Act or in the alternative for a writ of certiorari for quashing the said notice. 2. The impugned proceedings were initiated by the Income-tax Officer Urban Circle, and by the Special Income-tax Officer, Bangalore, on 15th March, 1951, 29th March, 1952, 2nd December, 1953, and 24th February, 1954, respectively for the purpose of the Mysore Income-tax Act, the escaped income of the petitioners. The petitioners contend that the Income-tax Officer had no jurisdiction or authority to start such proceedings. The argument in support of this contention is two-fold : (1) that section 34 of the Mysore Income-tax Act stood repealed on and from 1st April, 1959, and that therefore the notice issued under that section by the I...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : (1994)118CTR(Kar)449; ILR1994KAR913; [1994]206ITR237(KAR); [1994]206ITR237(Karn); 1994(38)KarLJ28
R.V. Raveendran, J.1. The third respondent is the owner of premises bearing Nos. 23-24, S.B.I. Senior Officers' Colony, Koramangala, III Block, Bangalore. The first petitioner is the tenant in respect of the first floor of the said premises having taken it on lease from the third respondent. For convenience the third respondent and first petitioner will (hereinafter be referred to as the 'owner' and the 'tenant'). The second petitioner is an employee of the first petitioner who is in occupation of the said first floor portion (hereinafter referred to as the 'tenanted portion'). According to the tenant, the lease was originally for a period of four years from May 10, 1985, and by mutual consent, it has been extended up to May 10, 1994. 2. The owner entered into an agreement dated January 21, 1993, with one Mr. Krishna Kapila agreeing to sell the entire property for a consideration of Rs. 26,50,000 and received Rs. 6,50,000 as advance. The agreement provided that the owner shall the prop...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : AIR1972Kant299; AIR1972Mys299
Venkataramiah, J. 1. The petitioners in these two cases are holders of mineral concessions granted by the State Government authorising them to conduct mining operations within Sandur Taluk, Bellary District. The petitioner in Writ Petition No. 1934 of 1967 is engaged in winning iron ore and the petitioner in Writ Petition No. 2131 of 1967 is winning both iron ore and manganese ore. By a notification issued under Sections 143 and 144 of the Mysore Village Panchayats and Local Boards Act. 1959 (hereinafter referred to as the State Act), the Taluk Development Board of Sandur having jurisdiction over the mining areas in which the petitioners are interested, levied licence fee on the mining of manganese ore, iron ore. red-oxide, barytes etc. Under Entry 62 of Schedule attached to the notification, persons engaged in mining of manganese and iron ore with the help of machinery had to pay Rs. 500/-per area and under Entry 63 persons engaged in mining of manganese and iron ore without the help ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : ILR1985KAR955; [1985]152ITR618(KAR); [1985]152ITR618(Karn)
Puttaswamy, J.1. On a reference made by one of us (Puttaswamy j.), this case has been posted before us for disposal. 2. One Y. D. Nanje Gowda of Belur down, Hassan District, who is the petitioner before us, is the karta of a Hindu Undivided Family ('HUF') consisting of himself, his wife and several other members and is an assessee under the W.T. Act of 1957 (Central Act No. 27 of 1957) ('the Act'), on the file of the First Wealth-tax Officer, Hassan ('WTO'). The wife of the petitioner had her own yet wealth exceeding Rs. 1,00,000 during the relevant assessment year. 3. For the assessment year 1977-78, the petitioner in the status of an HUF filed a return under the Act before the WTO, who by his order dated September 20, 1977, (exhibit-A) completed the assessment as on March 31, 1977, at Rs. 5,83,100 and levied tax at the rates chargeable thereto under the Act. On the determination of net wealth made by the WTO, the petitioner is not aggrieved. But, he is only aggrieved by the higher ra...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : 2001CriLJ3156; [2002(94)FLR928]; ILR2001KAR3683; 2001(4)KarLJ548
ORDER1. All these criminal petitions arise out of the similar orders passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Hassan in C.C. Nos. 2512 to 2522 of 1992 dismissing the applications filed under Section 239 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for discharge.2. The brief facts of the case are as follows:The Provident Fund Inspector, Employees' Provident Fund Organisation of Hassan Division filed complaints on 6-8-1991 for initiation of action under Section 14(1) and 14(1-A) of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 against the accused persons who are the Directors of M/s. Hemayathi Coffee Curing Works (Private) Limited, Hassan on account of the default in contributing to the Provident Fund of its employees as required under the Act and the scheme. The petitioners are accused 2, 4 and 5. It appears one of the accused viz., accused 6, G.M. Rajendra was found absconding. Therefore, the case against accused 6 came to be split up. When the matter was at ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : [2006]130CompCas705(Kar); ILR2006KAR255
ORDERRam Mohan Reddy, J.1. The petitioner a Company, for short the Transferor company' incorporated on 20th October 1995 under the Companies Act, 1956 (for short 'Act') having its registered office at No. 15-16, Vayudooth Chambers, 4th Floor, Trinity junction, M.G. Road, Bangalore-560001 has presented this petition seeking sanction of the scheme of amalgamation Exhibit-'E'.2. The main objects of the Transferor company is to carry on business of providing long term finance to any person or persons, firm, company, corporation, society, association of persons on such terms and conditions as the company may deem fit for the purpose of construction or purchase of house/flat in India for residential purpose, amongst other objects set out in the Memorandum and Articles of association Exhibit-'B'.3. The Authorised share capital of the Transferor company is Rs. 10 crores divided into 1 crore Equity shares of Rs. 10/- each while the issued, subscribed and paid up share capital is Rs. 10 crores d...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
..... reasons recorded under sub-section (2) of section 148. explanation 4 for the removal of doubts, it is hereby clarified that the provisions of this section, as amended by the finance act, 2012, shall also be applicable for any assessment year beginning on or before the 1st day of april, 2012. s.148: issue of notice where income has escaped assessment. (1) before making the assessment, reassessment or recomputation under section 147, the assessing officer shall serve on ..... under the head profits and gains of business or professionor income from other sourcesshall, subject to the provisions of sub-section (2), be computed in accordance with either cash or mercantile system of accounting regularly employed by the assessee. (2) the central government may notify in the official gazette from time to time accounting standards to be followed by any class of assessee or in respect of any class of income. (3) where the assessing officer is not satisfied about the correctness or completeness of .....
Tag this Judgment!