Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: insecticides act 1968 section 31 cognizance and trial of offence Court: karnataka Page 2 of about 242 results (0.039 seconds)

S.A. Jayanarayana and ors. Vs. State of Karnataka, by Its Seed Inspect ...

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : ILR2003KAR2395

..... before the court, the expiry date of the insecticide was already over and sending of the sample to the central insecticides laboratory at that late stage would be of no consequence. therefore, in view of section 24(3) and 245(4) of the insecticides act the report of the insecticide analyst was not conclusive. a valuable right had ..... been conferred on the accused to have the sample tested from the central insecticides laboratory and in the circumstances of the case the accused have ..... why in the form prescribed for submission of the report by the insecticide analyst, the dates of manufacture of the article and the expiry date are mentioned.section 30 provides for defences which may or may not be allowed in prosecution under the act. section 30(1) only prescribes in effect that ignorance could be no defence .....

V. Chandru and ors. Vs. State of Karnataka

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : 2002CriLJ1676; ILR2002KAR1205; 2002(2)KarLJ425

..... before the court, the expiry date of the insecticide was already over and sending of the sample to the central insecticides laboratory at that late stage would be of no consequence. therefore, in view of section 24(3) and 24(4) of the insecticides act, the report of the insecticide analyst was not conclusive. a valuable right had ..... been conferred on the accused to have the sample tested from the central insecticides laboratory and in the circumstances of the case the accused have ..... why in the form prescribed for submission of the report by the insecticide analyst, the dates of manufacture of the article and the expiry date are mentioned.section 30 provides for defences which may or may not be allowed in prosecution under the act. section 30(1) only prescribes in effect that ignorance would be no defence .....

S.A. Jayanarayana Vs. State of Karnataka

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : 2003CriLJ3245; 2003(4)KarLJ231

..... before the court, the expiry date of the insecticide was already over and sending of the sample to the central insecticides laboratory at that late stage would be of no consequence. therefore, in view of section 24(3) and 24(4) of the insecticides act, the report of the insecticide analyst was not conclusive. a valuable right had ..... been conferred on the accused to have the sample tested from the central insecticides laboratory and in the circumstances of the case the accused have ..... why in the form prescribed for submission of the report by the insecticide analyst, the dates of manufacture of the article and the expiry date are mentioned. section 30 provides for defences which may or may not be allowed in prosecution under the act. section 30(1) only prescribes in effect that ignorance would be no defence .....

Sonic Electro Hem Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Karn ...

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : [1997]107STC283(Kar)

..... the petitioner in his application dated 9th august, 1989, a copy of which has been produced as annexure a, wherein the petitioner has referred to the insecticide mats and fragrance mats as the one repelling mosquitoes and emanating fragrant smell. according to the learned government pleader, in view of the said case set ..... tax at 10 per cent. section 3a of the act provides that all officers and persons employed in the execution of the act shall observe and follow the directions given by the commissioner. therefore, when the question arises as to whether the petitioner is liable to pay tax treating the insecticide mats in question as the ..... one falling under entry no. 5 of part i of the second schedule or the one falling under entry no. 11 of part m of the second schedule, the respondent is required to consider the said question after hearing the petitioner. however, sri shivayogiswamy submitted that there is no provision provided under section 3a of the act .....

M/S Vapi Care Pharma Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of Karnataka

Court : Karnataka

..... be accepted. the paragraph 18 of the medicamen s case supra is reproduced here below: 18. in unique farmaid case which was a case under the insecticides act which has provisions analogous to section 25(4) of the act, the court found that the accused wp nos.347/2016 & 16134-36/2016 8 had indeed made a request to the inspector for sending the ..... , that the respondents in these appeals have been deprived of their valuable right to have the sample tested from the central insecticides laboratory under sub-section (4) of section 24 of the act. under sub- section (3) of section 24 report signed by the insecticide analyst shall be evidence of the facts stated therein and shall be conclusive evidence against the accused only if the accused do .....

State of Karnataka Vs. V. Subramanian

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : [1992]84STC230(Kar)

..... that the said circular included copper sulphate as a heavy chemical. it was declared that copper sulphate was a subject falling within entry no. 117 as 'insecticides'. the authorities under the act were required to regulate the levy and collection of sales tax on this basis. thereafter the revenue assessed the assessee under entry no. 117. the balance ..... not even agreeing to refund the excess collections to its customers itself is an indication that the assessee collected the tax at a higher rate in contravention of section 18; if actually the assessee has collected the tax at a higher rate by abundant caution, there was nothing in the way of the assessee agreeing to ..... refund the said excess to the customers and therefore, it is a clear case of contravention of section 18. 7. section 18-a read with section 18 are enacted to prevent the dealers from misusing the provisions of the act and collecting amounts by way of tax which are not lawfully leviable. the purpose certainly is to deter .....

Krishnaswamy Sridhar Vs. State By Cbi

Court : Karnataka

..... of the act are required to be complied with. as per provisions of section 33 of the act, in case any offence has been committed by the company, every ..... of this section, a) company means any body corporate and in cludes a firm or other association of individuals; and b) director , in relation to a firm, means a part ner in the firm.8. on perusal of section 33 of the act, it is clear that in case of violation by the company/firm under insecticide act, the provisions of section 33 ..... of the facts as mentioned above and law position explained as discussed in the above said paras, i am of the considered opinion that mandatory provisions of section 33 of the act have not been complied with as the complaint does not contain any specific averments with regard to role of the present 18 petitioner. moreover, in absence of .....

S.V. Halavapalli and Sons and ors. Vs. Commissioner of Commercial Taxe ...

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : [1984]57STC343(Kar)

..... a direction to respondent 2 not to levy tax at 4 per cent. 6. the petitioner in w.p. no. 12224 of 1982 is a dealer in fertilisers, sowing seeds, insecticides, etc. he purchases seeds within the state from other dealers and sells the same to others in the course of business. he is carrying on the business in the name ..... point tax is leviable and if they are not 'cereals', then they are goods in respect of which a multi-point tax is leviable. 9. section 5 of the act is the charging section. the relevant part of section 5 prior to 7th september, 1976, reads thus : '5. levy of tax on sale or purchase of goods. - (1) every dealer shall pay for each ..... .p. no. 11441 of 1983 and w.p. no. 12224 of 1982 as illustrative only. 2. the petitioner in w.p. no. 25396 of 1982 is a dealer in fertilisers, insecticides and certified seeds of maize, bajra, jowar, etc., in krishna nagar, sandur taulk. he purchases this seeds from others. he is registered dealer under the karnataka sales tax .....

Vasudeva Pai and Sons Vs. State of Karnataka

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : ILR1994KAR726

..... argument now advanced by the learned counsel for the appellants is that having regard to the power under section 8a of the act, in view of the exemption notification dated 29.6.1981 exempting levy of tax under section 6b of the act for insecticides under the insecticides act, the state has no power to issue notification in exercise of the power under ..... exemption is traceable only to the provision of section 8a of the act which confers necessary power on the state of karnataka.13. we will now deal with the exemption granted in respect of copper sulphate. it is not in dispute that under the schedule to the pesticides act 1968 (central act 46/68) copper sulphate finds a place in ..... the schedule to section 3(e) of the said act. indeed, it is also found in schedule ii to the karnataka sales tax act 1957 at entry 24. copper sulphate is also included in the exemption .....

The Commissioner of Income-tax, Bangalore and Another Vs. M/S. Namdhar ...

Court : Karnataka

..... order make these seeds as certified seeds, it has to be treated with insecticides and chemicals by a process. to consider the income from such activity as agricultural income, it should satisfy the requirement of section 2(1a)(b)(ii) of the act. as the process of converting hybrid seeds to certified seeds is not an ..... by trading in processed seeds would amount to agricultural activity on land taken on lease and is contract farming considered as agricultural income exempt under section 10(1) of the income tax act (act for short) by following the view expressed in earlier cases? 11. this court admitted ita no.75/2007 on the following substantial questions ..... ita 76/2007, the assessee m/s indo american exports filed return of income claiming the entire amount as agricultural income seeking exemption under section 10(1) of the income tax act (act for short) for the assessment year 1998-99. the assessing officer holding that the entire amount of profit was liable to tax under the .....