Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act 1976 Section 116 Remission Of Tax In Areas Included Or Extended In The Middle Of Half Year - Judgment Search Results
Home > Cases Phrase: karnataka municipal corporations act 1976 section 116 remission of tax in areas included or extended in the middle of half year Page 1 of about 180,529 results (0.125 seconds)K.K. Govindaraju and Vs. Commissioner, Corporation of City of Bangalor ...
Court: Karnataka
Reported in: ILR1987KAR1570
respondent contrary to the bye-laws and the provisions of the Karnataka Municipal Corporation Act 1976, this Writ Petition is filed by praying for grant of permission under Section 302 of the Municipal Corporation Act. In reply to the aforesaid petition, the Standing Act. Sub-section (4) of Section 443 of the Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act, 1976, which replaced the 1949 Act is similarly worded.In as required under Sub-section (2) of Section 301 of the Act. Therefore, the view taken by the Standing Committee that the power under Section 505 of the Karnataka Municipal Corporation Act, 1976 (for short 'the Act'), to revoke a licence granted earlier has secured deemed permission in terms of Subsection (2) of Section 302 of the Act is patently untenable.20. Learned Counsel for exceed 4650 Sq Ft. multiplied by 2.5, which comes to 11625 Sq.ft. However, under the sanctioned plan, plot coverage was 79 According to the petitioner, there was no reply from the Commissioner within 30 days from the date of the said application. upto 100055%1.751+314From 15 upto 181001 and above50%1.751+41718 and above.C (Other Areas)Upto 25065%1.501+211Upto 9241 upto 50060%1.501+314From 9 upto 12501 upto 75055%1.751+4.17From 12 extend the building as he has already constructed five floors including the basement floor under the licence secured in 1980, as there was no scope at all for the petitioner to extend the building as he has already constructed five floors including 3rd respondent has stated that he commenced construction in the year 1982. This is also supported by the endorsement issued by
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTSiddalingappa Vs. State of Karnataka
Court: Karnataka
Reported in: ILR1993KAR868; 1992(4)KarLJ728
is marked 'Confidential' and the same is reproduced below:'Government of KarnatakaKarnataka Government Secretariat,M.S. Building, Bangalore, dated 27th June 1992.No. HUD 172 by deputation of a K.M.A.S. officer of the rank of Municipal Commissioner Grade II or by promotion from immediate lower cadre, Bangalore in terms of Section 82 of the Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). It is under the category of posts under Section 82 of the Act.20. During the course of hearing an application, I.A.III, is filed terms of Section 82 of the Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). It is also stated posts on the Corporation establishment.-(1) Subject to the provision of Sections 85 and 86 appointment to posts on the corporation establishment that dislodging of the petitioner from the post of Deputy Commissioner and appointing the third respondent in his place, under the shall be on deputation ordinarily for a period of three years and if the corporation by two thirds majority of its
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTP.R. Ramesh and ors. Vs. the State of Karnataka by Its Chief Secretary ...
Court: Karnataka
Reported in: AIR2005Kant364; ILR2005KAR2526; 2005(6)KarLJ233
under any law for the time being in force. The Karnataka State Legislature had enacted the Act in the year 1976 the State representing constituencies which comprise wholly or partly the Municipal area;(iii) the members of the Council of States and the Whether Sub-section (2) of Section 10 of the Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act 1976 (for short 'the Act') which provides for one was inserted in the Constitution by the Constitution (Seventy-fourth) Amendment Act, 1992 which came into force with effect from 1.6.1993. The (2) of Section 10 of the Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act 1976 (for short 'the Act') which provides for one year tenure would be necessary to refer to the relevant provisions of Sections 8 and 10 of the Act which are reproduced hereunder part. Article 243-R deals with the composition of Municipalities and it reads as under:'243-R. Composition of Municipalities - (1) Save as in the Municipal area and for this purpose each Municipal area shall be divided into territorial constituencies to be known as elected. The word 'manner' as used in Article 243-R(2)(b) would include the mode in which the election is to take place clear that the duration of a Corporation shall be five years but the period for which a Mayor or a Deputy
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTMangalore Municipal Market Welfare Society Vs. Corporation of the City ...
Court: Karnataka
Reported in: ILR1993KAR86; 1993(1)KarLJ84
for agrarian reform.' (Please see : Srinivasa v. State of Karnataka : [1987]2SCR1189 ). The Court further held: 'Because the Directive in W.P.No. 13575 of 1985 is a Society called 'Mangalore Municipal Market Welfare Society' registered under the Karnataka Societies Act, 1960. be considered in this case is that the Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act, 1976 (Karnataka Act No. 14 of 1977) is a 1974 Act. It is also significant that the Municipal Corporations Act is a later enactment than the 1974 Act. The incorporation special provisions of Section 370 of the Corporations Act of 1976. Thus, a person who had been enjoying right of license of the lease in respect of immovable property defined under Section 105 of the Transfer of Property Act. Section 105 thereof to the Commissioner and Secretary, Municipal Administration, Bangalore, by the Commissioner of the Corporation bringing to his notice the promise held is also situated just in front of the said market area. The stall-holders and fish vendors having shifted their business to are just and necessary in the circumstances of the case including the award of costs. (iv) Interim prayer: Pending disposal of the Constitution are attracted in a case like this to extend benefit thereof to the members of the petitioner-Society? (5) Whether the alternate temporary sheds put up in Nehru Maidan about half a Kilo metre away from the Webster Market. Accordingly, the award in this behalf came to be passed in the year 1989; that pursuant to the passing of the award, possession
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTB. AshwIn Kumar and anr. Vs. the Mysore City Corporation by Its Commis ...
Court: Karnataka
Reported in: ILR2005KAR4223; 2005(6)KarLJ49
further submitted that even according to Section 443 of the Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act, it refers to collection of fees only, [1976]1SCR333 . Further referring to Section 443(2) of the Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act it is submitted that the relevant provision for grant of permission under Section 301 of the Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act, 1976?'4. Heard the Counsel for the respective parties on to Section 299 and 301 of the Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act held that the Corporation was entitled to issue demand notice there is no express provision in the Town Planning Act, 1976 for imposition of fee and the State Government has not the defendant-Corporation is authorised to collect the fees as per Section 299 of the Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act. As against it, be imposed save by authority of law, which reads thus;'No tax shall be levied or collected except by authority of law.'8. fee and to assist them in the development of municipal area and thereafter, it issued a notice as per Section 256(a) a sum of Rs. 77,600/- for issuance of licence, which includes licence fee Rs. 8,450/- ground rent Rs. 1,500/-, debris removal the fees for various purposes, essentially the service is being extended in the form of drainage to release filth, water and submitted on 16.9.95. Subsequently, after dragging the matter for one year the Engineering department sent the plan to the Town Planning
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTSavithri V. Rao Vs. Commissioner, Corporation of the City of Mangalore
Court: Karnataka
Reported in: ILR1986KAR2167; 1986(2)KarLJ132
Counsel for the Corporation relied on Section 369 of the Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act, 1976, which authorised the Corporation to regulate for the Corporation relied on Section 369 of the Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act, 1976, which authorised the Corporation to regulate the 1974 Act. The incorporation of Section 370 into the Municipal Corporations Act makes it clear that the Legislature considered that a provided under the Karnataka Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1974.'It is the above question which we are required to provisions of Section 370 of the Karnataka Municipal Corporation Act, 1976, for eviction of occupants of shops in a market or any condition of the license or any regulation made under Section 378 or in any bye-law made under Section 423 or the license was granted, which had been terminated by the Commissioner by the issue of notices impugned in the Writ Petitions, to all premises of the State and all its instrumentalities including local authorities. Section 370, however, is a special provision applicable and by continuing even after 31-3-1982 for more than four years without license from the Corporation. Therefore, the Learned Counsel for
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTB. Krishnabhat Vs. Bangalore Development Authority
Court: Karnataka
Reported in: ILR1988KAR2865; 1988(2)KarLJ481
relating to the procedure followed by the Municipality under the Karnataka Municipalities Act 1964 in the matter of levy of tax. to the procedure followed by the Municipality under the Karnataka Municipalities Act 1964 in the matter of levy of tax. Therefore, the statement of objections) under the relevant provisions of the Corporations Act. The same has been reiterated in para 7 of in terms of Sections 103 to 106 of the Corporations Act.9. A look at these Sections clearly points to an inescapable power under Section 29 of the Bangalore Development Authority Act 1976 (hereinafter referred to as 'the B. D. A. Act') expired required to follow before it levies tax in terms of Sections 103 to 106 of the Corporations Act.9. A look at form. Any inhabitant objecting to the imposition of the said tax may within one month from the publication in the Official by the learned Counsel appearing for the B.D.A. that the areas in question wherein sites have been formed, taxes were being ordinarily resident in the area of the said local authority included in the City who shall be nominated by the Government Corporations Act. Tax so far collected for the last three years from the date of the petitions shall be refunded to
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTParvathi Bai Vs. State of Karnataka
Court: Karnataka
Reported in: ILR1986KAR3258
City Corporation, under Sub-section (1) of Section 321 of the Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act, 1976; and also the Order passed under from the purview of the relevant provisions of the Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act including Section 321 thereof, Rules and bye-laws regulating whether the proviso to Section 304 of the Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act, 1976 is attracted to construction of a building for purview of the relevant provisions of the Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act including Section 321 thereof, Rules and bye-laws regulating the erection (1) of Section 321 of the Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act, 1976; and also the Order passed under Sub-section (3) of Section question raised in this appeal is whether the proviso to Section 304 of the Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act, 1976 is attracted Survey No. 13/1 of Gangenahalli- division No. 46.3. In The Commissioner, Bangalore City Corporation v. Sangeeth Theatre & Anr., WA No. limit number of places that can be licensed in any area. Sections of the Act, directs the licensing authority that it of the relevant provisions of the Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act including Section 321 thereof, Rules and bye-laws regulating the erection or
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTRajatha Enterprises Vs. Commissioner, Corporation of City of Bangalore
Court: Karnataka
Reported in: ILR1996KAR1772; 1996(6)KarLJ1
of these Acts the total cess recoverable comes to 31%:1. Karnataka Compulsory PrimaryEducation Act. (Section 16) - 15%2. Karnataka Health Cess scope or object of the statute.'In the case of BOMBAY MUNICIPAL CORPORATION v. DHONDU NARAYAN CHOWDHARY, : [1965]2SCR929 it has been read as under:'Section 148. Corporation to revise taxes:- (1) The Corporation shall revise any tax imposed by it once every five been issued for increase of the property tax based on actual rent received by the petitioner on floor wise competition of contrary to the provisions of the Karnataka Municipal Corporation Act, 1976 ('the Act', in short) and the measures laid down for it requires no speculation about the fixation of rent under Section 109(2) of the Act. This provision on being construed in rent has to be the basis for determining the property tax and not the actual rent received, can have any application and III of this Act shall be applicable to the areas specified in Schedule I: Provided that the said Parts shall rent does not apply to buildings constructed after 1.8.1957 which includes part/s thereof like different floors for a period of five to have taken effect on the first day of the half year in which it is made: Provided that when the impugned assessments pertain to the period which falls within five years from the date of construction of the building. Therefore, the
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTThe Agricultural Produce Market Committee and ors. Vs. the State of Ka ...
Court: Karnataka
Reported in: ILR2003KAR4225
a Standing Committee thereof, under the Karnataka Municipalities Act, 1964, Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act, 1976 and the Karnataka Zilla Parishads, Taluk law for the time being in force, the Corporation, the Municipal Council or the Mandal Panchayat or any Standing Committee thereof Committee thereof, under the Karnataka Municipalities Act, 1964, Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act, 1976 and the Karnataka Zilla Parishads, Taluk Panchayath Samithis, and other premises established in any market under the APMC Act. Section 504 of the Act only makes such of those under the Karnataka Act Nos. 22 and 1964, 14 of 1976 and 20 of 1985 - (1) in any area or rejected the contention of the appellants that by virtue of Section 504 of the Act, the Markets established under the provisions 9 of the APMC Act, are exempted from the property tax so long as they remain with the Market Committee and as the Market established and the premises located in the area of the market committee and the notice issued demanding the
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT- << Prev.
- Next >>