SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, MYSORE v. ANASUYA BAI

3 SCC 313Reported decision2017#15572 most cited
6

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 341,001 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2024.

Judgments citing SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, MYSORE v. ANASUYA BAI

Vaidya Srikantappa Sadashivaiah Srikanth, Bangalore vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore- 1, Bangalore

ITA 200/BANG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Aug 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Sri Ravi Shankar S.V., A.RFor Respondent: Shri D.K. Mishra, D.R
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 263Section 45(5)Section 54

…e been dismissed on the ground of suppression of material facts. Secondly, the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Special Land Acquisition Officer, KIADB, Mysore and Another vs. Anasuya Bai (Dead) by Legal Representatives and Others, [(2017) 3 SCC 313] (Anasuya Bai), would squarely apply in the instant case, wherein it was categorically held that Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act does not apply to the acquisition proceedings initiated under KIAD Act. Therefore, the learned Single Judge was justified in dismissing the writ petition. There is no merit in this appeal and hence, the same may be dismisse…

M/S. Hanumanthappa Chandrashekar, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - 3(2)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1223/BANG/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Aug 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: Sri.K.R.Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Ganesh R.Ghale, Standing Counsel
Section 46Section 96

…en dismissed on the ground of suppression of material facts. 10. Secondly, the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Special Land Acquisition Officer, KIADB, Mysore and Another vs. Anasuya Bai (Dead) by Legal Representatives and Others, [(2017) 3 SCC 313] (Anasuya Bai), would squarely apply in the instant case, wherein it was categorically held that Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act does not apply to the acquisition proceedings initiated under KIAD Act. Therefore, the learned Single Judge was justified in dismissing the writ petition. There is no merit in this appeal and hence, the same may be dismisse…

M/S Sri Balaji Corporate Services vs. Union of India Ministry of Finance

WP/43206/2018HC Karnataka21 Apr 2022

Bench: The Hon'Ble Mr.Justice S.R.Krishna Kumar

Section 96

…o longer res integra and it has been held that Section 24(2) does not apply to the proceeding under 1966 Act. In this connection, reference has been made to decision of Supreme Court in 'SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, MYSORE V. ANASUYA BAI', (2017) 3 SCC 313. 51. By the aforesaid Amendment Act, the state government has been granted the power to exempt the projects mentioned therein from the application of Chapter II and III of the Act. The KIADB vide its resolution dated 27.08.2016 has resolved to determine the amount of compensation in respect of the land which may 27 be acquired un…

L. Venkataramana Raju vs. Union of India

WP/53718/2017HC Karnataka21 Apr 2022

Bench: The Hon'Ble Mr.Justice S.R.Krishna Kumar

Section 96

…o longer res integra and it has been held that Section 24(2) does not apply to the proceeding under 1966 Act. In this connection, reference has been made to decision of Supreme Court in 'SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, MYSORE V. ANASUYA BAI', (2017) 3 SCC 313. 51. By the aforesaid Amendment Act, the state government has been granted the power to exempt the projects mentioned therein from the application of Chapter II and III of the Act. The KIADB vide its resolution dated 27.08.2016 has resolved to determine the amount of compensation in respect of the land which may 27 be acquired un…

Smt. S. Jalaja vs. Union of India

In the result, writ appeals are allowed

WA/1105/2019HC Karnataka24 Aug 2021

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

Section 4

…ND ANOTHER VS. MUDAPPA AND OTHERS', (2007) 9 SCC 768, 'S.S.DARSHAN VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA AND OTHERS', (1996) 7 SCC 302, 'SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER , KIADB, MYSORE AND ANOTHR VS. ANASUYA BAI (DEAD) BY LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES AND OTHERS', (2017) 3 SCC 313, 'STATE OF A.P. AND OTHERS VS. MCDOWELL & CO. AND OTHERS', (1996) 3 SCC 709, and 'SECURITY ASSOCIATION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER VS. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS', (2014) 12 SCC 65. 16. Learned counsel for respondent Nos.6 & 7 in W.P.No.55704/2019 has adopted the submissions made by learned Advocate General and learned Senior counsel for respon…

Commossioner of Income Tax-Delhi-1X vs. Krishna Sachdeva

Appeal is dismissed

ITA/80/2016HC Delhi27 Jan 2016

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

Section 100Section 498A

…5 of 7 of the daughter-in-law on the ancestral property in which her husband has a share. Learned counsel for the appellant has placed reliance on following judgments in support of his contention: (i) B. P. Achala Anand Vs S. Appi Reddy & anr. (2005) 3 SCC 313 (ii) S. R. Batra & anr. Vs Smt. Taruna Batra 136 (2007) DLT 1 (SC) (iii) Dr. Abdul Rehim Undre Vs Padma Abdur Rahim Undre AIR 1982 Bombay 341 (iv) Smt. Dipo Vs Wassan Singh & Ors. AIR 1983 Supreme Court 846 (v) S. Melagiriyappa & Ors. Vs Lalithamma AIR 1961 Mysore 152 (vi) Commissioner of Income Tax, Bombay Vs Gomedall…

SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, MYSORE v. ANASUYA BAI (3 SCC 313) — Cited in 6 Judgments | BharatTax