SRI. ANILKUMAR S/O ANANT MUTTAGI vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

PDF · subscribers
WP/108540/2017HC KarnatakaKAHC02003243201710 January 2018Bench: K.S.MUDAGAL3 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The Court noted that the petitions were to stand dismissed if office objections were not complied with within a stipulated time. As the condition was not met, the petitions were dismissed.

What were the facts?

The petitioners sought a refund of income tax deducted by the Special Land Acquisition Officer, arguing it was exempt under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Act, 2013. They also requested consideration of their representations.

What were the issues?

Whether the income tax deducted was exempt under the relevant Land Acquisition Act and if the respondents should refund the amount. The procedural issue of non-compliance with court objections also led to dismissal.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 96

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

W.P.Nos.108540-541/2017 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH

DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF JANUARY 2018 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S.MUDAGAL

WRIT PETITION NOS.108540-541/2017 (LA RES)

BETWEEN:

1.

SRI. ANILKUMAR S/O ANANT MUTTAGI AGE: 55 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O: H.NO.68/1, RAJ NAGAR, VISHWESHWAR NAGAR, HUBBALLI, TQ: HUBBALLI, DIST: DHARWAD.

2.

SRI.VEERESH S/O KARIBASAPPA HANCHINAL AGE: YEARS, OCC: CONTRACT, R/O: C/O. K.V. HANCHINAL, CLASS I CONTRACTOR, HERESRUR ROAD, MUNDARAGI, TQ: MUNDARAGI, DIST: GADAG. ... PETITIONERS

(BY SRI.HEMANTHKUMAR L HAVARAGI, ADV.)

W.P.Nos.108540-541/2017 2

AND

1.

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU, RPTD. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY.

2.

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, DHARWAD DIST: DHARWAD.

3.

THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, AND ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, DHARWAD, DIST: DHARWAD.

4.

THE TAHASHILDAR HUBBALLI, TQ: HUBBALLI, DIST: DHARWAD. ... RESPONDENTS

THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO a) DIRECT THE RESPONDENT NO.3 TO REFUND AN INCOME TAX OF RS.2,85,716/- AND RS.9,744/- TO THE PETITIONERS WRONGLY DEDUCTED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.3 AND THE INCOME TAX IS EXEMPTED UNDER SECTION 96 OF THE RIGHT TO FAIR COMPENSATION AND TRANSPARENCY IN LAND ACQUISITION, REHABILITATION AND RESETTLEMENT ACT 2013 (CENTRAL ACT NO.30 OF 20130.

W.P.Nos.108540-541/2017 3 b) DIRECT THE RESPONDENT NO.3 TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATIONS DATED:21.04.2017, AND DATED:05.05.2017 VIDE ANNEXURE-C AND D RESPECTIVELY.

THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR DISMISSAL FOR NON-COMPLIANCE OF OFFICE OBJECTIONS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: ORDER On 7.11.2017 finally four weeks time was granted to do the needful with a condition that on failure to do so the petitions shall stand dismissed. Since order is not complied, the petitions have stood dismissed. Therefore disposed of accordingly.

Sd/- JUDGE Vmb

More judgments on Section 96

All 68 judgments and leading authorities on Section 96 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →