M/S. KARNATAKA INSTRADE CORPORATION LIMITED vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

The appeal is allowed in part

Bench: B.MANOHAR,VINEET SARAN

capital gain. In order to keep the cement factory in workable condition, the assessee had to incur expenditure and these expenditure are allowable. The order passed by the Tribunal runs contrary to the law 16 laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax V/S. M/s.Virmani Industries Pvt. Limited reported

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SRI D G GOPALA GOWDA

The appeal is dismissed

Bench: B.MANOHAR,N.KUMAR

capital gain as it is the job to be done by the Assessing Authority and therefore, the Tribunal committed a serious error in interfering with the order of the revisional authority. He submitted that the revisional authority while exercising power of revision, could have passed a final order on 6 merits, but it also has discretion and the power

M/S WIPRO LIMITED vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

The appeals stand disposed of, accordingly

Bench: N.KUMAR,B.SREENIVASE GOWDA

Section 145A of the Income- tax Act which was inserted with effect from assessment year 1999-2000. The said provision states that the valuation of stock should include the amount of any tax duty, cess or fee - 94 - actually paid or incurred to bring the goods to its present location and condition. The Department has followed a consistent stand

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S WIPRO LTD

The appeals stand disposed of, accordingly

Bench: N.KUMAR,B.SREENIVASE GOWDA

Section 145A of the Income- tax Act which was inserted with effect from assessment year 1999-2000. The said provision states that the valuation of stock should include the amount of any tax duty, cess or fee - 94 - actually paid or incurred to bring the goods to its present location and condition. The Department has followed a consistent stand

SRI B V ACHARYA S/O LATE RAMACHANDRA ACHARYA vs. SRI N VENKATESHAIAH

Bench: V.JAGANNATHAN

capitation fee issue is concerned, the 18 submission made is that the writ petition filed in this regard by the students came to be dismissed by this court. Therefore, none of the offences alleged in the complaint can be said to have been, even remotely, made out against the petitioner and thus, it is clear that the entire complaint

THE PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S KWALITY BISCUITS PVT LTD

The appeal is disposed of with liberty as prayed for by the learned

Bench: S.G.PANDIT,C.M. POONACHA

Section 147 of the Income tax Act, as the reason for reopening emanates from the books of accounts of the assessee from which the material evidence of escapement of LTCG has been discovered by the Assessing Officer with due diligence required for reopening of the assessment? 3. Whether under the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right

DR ARJUN KALASAPUR vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

Bench: The Hon'Ble Mr. Justice Krishna S.Dixit

155. DR. PAVAN KUMAR K S/O. KALAIAH N, AGED 28 YEARS DOOR NO. 396, 3RD CROSS, 7TH MAIN, H BLOCK, RAMAKRISHNA NAGAR, MYSURU 570022 156. DR. BOOBATHI RAJA S/O. GOPAL R, AGED 27 YEARS NO. 7, RR GARDENS, KAVUNDAMPALAYAM ROAD, EDAYARPALAYAM, COIMBATORE 641025 157. DR. SHANMUGAPRIYA D D/O. DURAISAMY K, AGED 28 YEARS NO. 15/5,M PAPPAMPATTI, VAGARAYAMPALAYA, COIMBATORE

DR. MADHAVA. M. vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

Bench: The Hon'Ble Mr. Justice Krishna S.Dixit

155. DR. PAVAN KUMAR K S/O. KALAIAH N, AGED 28 YEARS DOOR NO. 396, 3RD CROSS, 7TH MAIN, H BLOCK, RAMAKRISHNA NAGAR, MYSURU 570022 156. DR. BOOBATHI RAJA S/O. GOPAL R, AGED 27 YEARS NO. 7, RR GARDENS, KAVUNDAMPALAYAM ROAD, EDAYARPALAYAM, COIMBATORE 641025 157. DR. SHANMUGAPRIYA D D/O. DURAISAMY K, AGED 28 YEARS NO. 15/5,M PAPPAMPATTI, VAGARAYAMPALAYA, COIMBATORE

DR SHARATH B RAJU vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

Bench: The Hon'Ble Mr. Justice Krishna S.Dixit

155. DR. PAVAN KUMAR K S/O. KALAIAH N, AGED 28 YEARS DOOR NO. 396, 3RD CROSS, 7TH MAIN, H BLOCK, RAMAKRISHNA NAGAR, MYSURU 570022 156. DR. BOOBATHI RAJA S/O. GOPAL R, AGED 27 YEARS NO. 7, RR GARDENS, KAVUNDAMPALAYAM ROAD, EDAYARPALAYAM, COIMBATORE 641025 157. DR. SHANMUGAPRIYA D D/O. DURAISAMY K, AGED 28 YEARS NO. 15/5,M PAPPAMPATTI, VAGARAYAMPALAYA, COIMBATORE

DR PRESTEENA MATHEW vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

Bench: The Hon'Ble Mr. Justice Krishna S.Dixit

155. DR. PAVAN KUMAR K S/O. KALAIAH N, AGED 28 YEARS DOOR NO. 396, 3RD CROSS, 7TH MAIN, H BLOCK, RAMAKRISHNA NAGAR, MYSURU 570022 156. DR. BOOBATHI RAJA S/O. GOPAL R, AGED 27 YEARS NO. 7, RR GARDENS, KAVUNDAMPALAYAM ROAD, EDAYARPALAYAM, COIMBATORE 641025 157. DR. SHANMUGAPRIYA D D/O. DURAISAMY K, AGED 28 YEARS NO. 15/5,M PAPPAMPATTI, VAGARAYAMPALAYA, COIMBATORE

DR SWAMY MANJUNATH S T vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

Bench: The Hon'Ble Mr. Justice Krishna S.Dixit

155. DR. PAVAN KUMAR K S/O. KALAIAH N, AGED 28 YEARS DOOR NO. 396, 3RD CROSS, 7TH MAIN, H BLOCK, RAMAKRISHNA NAGAR, MYSURU 570022 156. DR. BOOBATHI RAJA S/O. GOPAL R, AGED 27 YEARS NO. 7, RR GARDENS, KAVUNDAMPALAYAM ROAD, EDAYARPALAYAM, COIMBATORE 641025 157. DR. SHANMUGAPRIYA D D/O. DURAISAMY K, AGED 28 YEARS NO. 15/5,M PAPPAMPATTI, VAGARAYAMPALAYA, COIMBATORE

SMT. M R PRABHAVATHY vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice K.Natarajan Election Petition No.1 Of 2019 Connected With Election Petition No.2 Of 2019

155 to 158, 160 to 169, 171 to 180, 182 to 192, 196 to 201 but not true copy. iii. The advocate for the petitioner has not signed on the documents page Nos.128 and 129, iv. The petitioner has alleged the respondent is guilty of corrupt practice but has not filed the affidavit in the format prescribed in Form No.25

R JANARDHANA BABU vs. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR

Accordingly, the writ petitions are allowed

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice B. Veerappa

155. Juliana S Samuel, d/o M A Doss, aged about 56 years, Working as pharma Assistant, Glaxosmithkline Pharmaceuticals Limited, Devanahalli Road, Off Old Madras Road, Bangalore-560049 44 156. Nirupama Prasad, d/o E.V Raghava Rao, aged about 56 years, Working as pharma Assistant, Glaxosmithkline Pharmaceuticals Limited, Devanahalli Road, Off Old Madras Road, Bangalore-560049 157. Sherin Achuthan Kutty

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (4) vs. M/S CHAMUNDI WINERY AND DISTILLERY

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

SECTION 37 OF THE ACT. Page No 7 CIT Vs. Rajasthan State Government Sugar Mills Ltd 393 ITR 421 (Raj) 32-42 8 CIT Vs. G Balraj [2017] 390 ITR 50 (Kar) 43-47 10 CIT Vs. Chandulal Keshaval & Co., 38 ITR 601 (SC) 58-63 15 Sasoon J David

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S CHAMUNDI WINERY AND DISTILLERY

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

SECTION 37 OF THE ACT. Page No 7 CIT Vs. Rajasthan State Government Sugar Mills Ltd 393 ITR 421 (Raj) 32-42 8 CIT Vs. G Balraj [2017] 390 ITR 50 (Kar) 43-47 10 CIT Vs. Chandulal Keshaval & Co., 38 ITR 601 (SC) 58-63 15 Sasoon J David

SATISH N vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice Raghvendra S. Chauhan

Section 93 of the Act, namely "a canvasser…solicits the customer for such vehicle (public service vehicle) ”. Therefore, an aggregator is covered under Section 93 of the Act. 53. Of course, Mr. Sajan Poovayya, the learned Senior counsel, has argued that an aggregator does not go on to the road to solicit customers. But in the Digital Age, the internet

MASTER BALACHANDAR KRISHNAN vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

Bench: B.V.NAGARATHNA,RAVI V HOSMANI

Section 8 of the Act provides for the authorities of the School which are five in number. Section 18 of the Act which deals with authorities and Officers of the School etc., states that the authorities of the School and their composition, powers, functions and other matters relating to them, the officers of the School and their appointment, powers, functions

RAMA vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,B.A.PATIL

SECTIONS 2, 7, 11, 20 OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING AND PROHIBITION ACT OF 2011 AS VOID, ARBITRARY, UNJUST AS THEY ARE VIOLATIVE OF PROVISIONS OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA. IN W.P. NO.22817/2018: BETWEEN: SRI. MANJUNATHA AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS S/O LATE GOVINDAPPA R/AT H. THIMMAPURA VILLAGE 122 BELENHALLI POST, KASABA HOBLI TARIKERE TALUK, CHIKKAMAGALURU DISTRICT - 577 228. ...PETITIONER