Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Jun-11-1985
Reported in : ILR1985KAR2132; 1985(2)KarLJ172
ORDERPuttaswamy, J.1. Whether the suo moto revisional power conferred by Section 22-A(1) of theKarnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957 (Karnataka Act 25 of 1957) ('the Act') has been exercised or initiated within a period of four years from the date of the order or not as required by Section 22-A(2) of the Act and therefore barred by time or not is the short and interesting question that arises for determination in these cases. In order to appreciate the same, it is necessary in the first instance to notice the facts of the case in Writ Petition No. 16098 of 1981 in some detail as illustrative only and the other cases in general.2-1. WRIT PETITION NO. 16098 OF 1981 : For the assessment years 1970-71 the purchase turnovers of paddy effected by the petitioner amounting to Rs 12,69,286-25 and Rs. 29,93,521-26 was brought to tax under the Act by the Commercial Tax Officer, Gangavathi ('CTO') in hisassessment orders made on 29-9-1973 and 30-4-1974. Against the said orders of the CTO, the petitioner f...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Jun-11-1985
Reported in : [1986]62STC102(Kar)
ORDERPuttaswamy, J.1. Whether the suo motu revisional power conferred by section 22-A(1) of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957 (Karnataka Act 25 of 1957) ('the Act') has been exercised or initiated within a period of four years from the date of the order or not as required by section 22-A(2) of the Act and therefore barred by time or not is the short and interesting question that arises for determination in these cases. In order to appreciate the same, it is necessary in the first instance to notice the facts of the case in Writ Petition No. 16098 of 1981 in some details as illustrative only and the other cases in general. 2-1. Writ Petition No. 16098 of 1981. - For the assessment year 1970-71 the purchase turnovers of paddy effected by the petitioner amounting to Rs. 12,69,286.25 and Rs. 29,93,521.26 was brought to tax under the Act by the Commercial Tax Officer, Gangavathi 'CTO', in his assessment orders made on 29th September, 1973, and 30th April, 1974. Against the said orders of th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Sep-29-1985
Reported in : AIR1988Kant293; ILR1987KAR3615
Shivashankar Bhat, J. 1. W.P. N9. 12587/85 is by Bharatiya Veterinary Educational Society and three others (all of them are collectively referred hereinafter as 'the society' or as society and its co petitioners). W.P. Nos. 14696 and 18238/1985 are by 102 petitioners, who are referred as the 'students'. The first two respondents are common in these writ petitions. In the writ petitions filed by the students, the society is imp leaded as the 3rd respondent and the College in question is the 4th respondent..2. The society seeks the quashing of S. 6A of the University of Agricultural Sciences Act, 1963 (a State enactment - referred hereinafter as the Act'), by declaring the said section as unconstitutional. In the writ petitions filed- by the students, they seek a direction to the State Government to initiate an appropriate action against the society and the college., by invoking S. 27-A of the 'Karnataka Societies Registration Act, in the light of S. 6-A of the Act. They also seek provis...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Aug-09-1985
Reported in : ILR1986KAR2451; [1985]60STC361(Kar)
Rajasekhara Murthy, J. 1. In these two petitions the petitioner is the Indian Aluminium Co. Ltd., Belgaum, a public limited company. The petitioner is a manufacturer of aluminium and its alloys in all forms, ingots, aluminium billets and other by-products. 2. The petitioner-company is a registered dealer both under the KST and CST Acts. For the period 1st April, 1973 to 31st March, 1974 the petitioner's turnover was subjected to tax under the KST and CST Acts by assessment order dated 21st July, 1975 by the Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Assessment), Dharwar. 3. The petitioner assesses returned a gross turnover of Rs. 12,93,87,969.09 for the period in question. In the assessment completed under the KST Act, the sales effected within the State were subjected to tax at the rate of 6 per cent. The assessee claimed exemption in respect of its inter-State sales of the aggregate value of Rs. 1,03,28,598.74. The assessing officer, on scrutiny of the documents produced by the asse...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Jun-07-1985
Reported in : 1986(10)ECC17; 1985(5)LC2013(Karnataka); 1985(21)ELT655(Kar); [1987]165ITR342(KAR); [1987]165ITR342(Karn)
1. As the questions that arise for determination in these appeals between the same parties are interconnected, we propose to dispose of them by a common judgment. 2. M/s I. T. C. Ltd., a public limited company, incorporated under the Companies Act, which is respondent-1 before us, petitioner No. 1 in W.P. Nos. 11792 of 1978 and 2413 of 1978 out of which these appeals arise and will be hereafter referred to as the respondent. The respondent is inter alia engaged in the manufacture and sale of cigarettes and tobacco products in its five factories situated in different parts of the country, one of which is situated in the City of Bangalore, with which factory products only we are concerned in these appeals. As manufacturer of cigarettes and tobacco products, the respondent is exigible to excise duty under the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 (Central Act No. 1 of 1944) and the Rules made thereunder ('the Act'and 'the Rules'). 3. For the periods from (1) 17-2-1972 to 31-1-1972, (2) 16-2-...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Apr-15-1985
Reported in : ILR1985KAR1833
ORDERBopanna, J.1. The points that arise for consideration in these Petitions are of far reaching consequences on the implementation of theKarnataka and Reforms Act, 1961 (in short the Act) and therefore by my order dated 15-1-1985 I had invited the members of the Bar who were interested in assisting this Court to submit their views and accordingly in addition to the Learned Counsel for the Petitioners and Respondents in these petitions, S. R. Nayak, P. Ganapathy Bhat, T. R. Subbanna, F. V.Patil, Jayakumar S. Patil, B. Veera-bhadrappa, K. Krishna Bhat, K. Appa Rao, V.V. Upadhyaya, V. T. Rayaraddi, S. R. Bannurmath, K. S. Vyasa Rao, T. S. Ramachandra, Advocates, and Sri B. R. Nanjundiah, High Court Government Advocate, had submitted their arguments and I had the benefit of their views on the points for adjudication in these Petitions.2. The Petitioner in Writ Petitions Numbers 18168 and 18169/1981 claims to be the tenant of the lands bearing survey number 16, measuring 3 acres 29 guntas...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Aug-16-1985
Reported in : ILR1986KAR1365; 1985(2)KarLJ397; [1985]60STC142(Kar)
ORDERPuttaswamy, J.1. On a reference made by one of us, these cases were posted before a Division Bench for disposal. 2. A statutory Board called 'the Coffee Board' ('the Board') which was formerly called the Indian Coffee Market Expansion Board constituted and functioning under the Coffee Act of 1942 (Central Act VII of 1942) ('the Coffee Act') is the common petitioner before us and the principal question that arises for our determination is whether it is exigible to purchase tax or not under section 6 of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act of 1957 (Karnataka Act 25 of 1957) ('KST Act'). In order to decide that principal and certain other allied questions, it is necessary to notice the facts that are not also in dispute in the first instance. 3. On the out break of the II World War, the Indian coffee that enjoyed precious export markets in European and other advanced countries lost them and the industry was facing a crisis. With the object of rehabilitating the industry and placing it on a so...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Jan-24-1985
Reported in : ILR1985KAR688
ORDERRama Jois, J.1. In these Writ Petitions, the Petitioners, have questioned the validity of the notifications issued by the StateGovernment under Section 3 of the Minimum Wages Act ('the Act' for short) fixing minimum wages for various employments specified in Part-II of the Schedule to the Act. The first group of these Petitions are by the employers and the second group are by Trade Unions on behalf of workmen in various industries. Both are aggrieved by the impugnednotifications, but for different reasons.2. The facts of the case, in brief, and to the extent necessary for the consideration of general points arising for consideration in these Petitions are as follows : Minimum wages had been fixed for various categories of employees in different schedule employments under the Act by earlier notifications issued in or about the year 3978-79 under Section 3 of the Act. In the year 1981, the StateGovernment proposed to revise the rates of minimum wages by the mode specified in Section...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Feb-13-1985
Reported in : AIR1986Kant21; ILR1985KAR2477
Puttaswamy, J. 1. On a reference made by one of us (Puttaswamy, J.) these cases have been posted before us for disposal.2. As common questions of law arise for determination in these cases, I propose to dispose of them by a common order.3. All the petitioners hold licences called 'Touring Cinema Licences' issued in their favour by the concerned District Magistrates of the Districts ('DMs') presently under the Karnataka Cinemas (Regulation) Act of 1964 (Karnataka Act 23 of 1964) ('the Act') and the Karnataka Cinemas (Regulation) Rules, 1971 ('the Rules') for exhibiting films at the places detailed in their respective licences. The licences have been re-granted from time to time and were due for re-grant sometime before 3-5-1984 or immediately thereafter as is the case.4. After a series of amendments to the Rules, their periodical and endless challenges before this Court, which so far regretfully ended up only in abortive results, to which aspect I will have occasion to refer to it in so...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Apr-09-1985
Reported in : (1985)48CTR(Kar)88; ILR1985KAR1543; [1985]155ITR81(KAR); [1985]155ITR81(Karn)
Puttaswamy, J.1. On a reference made by one of us (Puttaswamy J.), these cases were posted before us for disposal. 2. As the petitioners in these writ petitions have challenged the constitutional validity of s. 44AB of the I.T. Act of 1961 (Central Act 43 of 1961) ('the Act'), we propose to dispose of these petitions by this order. 3. There are two groups of petitioners. The first group, who are the petitioners in Writ Petitions Nos. 1585 to 1603 and Nos. 3775 to 3788 of 1985 are professionals who are authorised by law and s. 288 of the Act in particular to appear, act and plead for the assessees before all the authorities under the Act. We will hereafter refer to them as ITPs. 4. The ITPs consist of advocates who are on the rolls of one or the other Bar Council in the country, whose enrolment, conduct and other related matters are regulated by the Advocates Act of 1961 (Central Act No. 25 of 1961). A number of advocates, some of whom are petitioners before us, besides possessing a qua...
Tag this Judgment!