KAMALSAB S/O. DAWOODSAB SAVANUR vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice Aravind Kumar Writ Petition No. 79811 Of 2013(Lr) Between Sri. Kamalsab S/O. Dawoodsab Savanur Age: 51 Years, Occ: Agriculture R/O. Kotigeri Oni, Hangal, Dist:Haveri. ... Petitioner (By Sri. D L Ladkhan, Advocate) & 1. The State Of Karnataka R/By Secretary Department Of Revenue M.S. Building, Bengaluru 2. The Land Tribunal, Hangal R/By Its Secretary Tq:Hangal, Dist: Haveri 3. Sri. Ramachandra Hemajippa Sugandhi Since Deceased By His Lrs 3A. Smt. Sunanda W/O. Krishna Sugandhi Age: Major, Occ: Household Work R/O. Bazar Galli, Near Chavadi Hangal, Dist: Haveri

condoned. In other words, where circumstances justifying the conduct exist, the illegality which is manifest, cannot be sustained on the sole ground of laches. When substantial justice and technical considerations are pitted against each other, the cause of substantial justice deserves to be preferred, for the other side cannot claim to have a vested right in the injustice being done

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M/S GOLF VIEW HOMES LTD

Bench: P.S.DINESH KUMAR,JAYANT PATEL

31) of the appellate order. “Moreover the appellant company has continued to construct one building after another and also acquiring property rights in M/s.Diamond 6 District, M/s.Platinum City and M/s.India Builders Association. So the appellant’s activity as a developer and contractor is well organized and continuous.” Similar findings are also recorded at pages 31/32 and 33 of the appellate

THE CENTRAL BOARD OF TRUSTEES vs. MR. GOPAL S HEBBALLI

Appeals are dismissed as not

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice K. Natarajan Criminal Appeal No.100124/2022 C/W Criminal Appeal Nos. 100123/2022, 100125/2022, 100126/2022, 100127/2022, 100130/2022, 100131/2022, 100132/2022, 100133/2022, 100134/2022, 100135/2022, 100136/2022, 100137/2022, 100138/2022, 100139/2022, 100140/2022, 100141/2022, 100142/2022, 100143/2022, 100144/2022, 100145/2022, 100172/2022, 100173/2022, 100026/2022, 100077/2022, 100078/2022, 100079/2022, 100080/2022, 100081/2022, 100082/2022, 100083/2022, 100084/2022, 100085/2022, 100086/2022, 100090/2022, 100091/2022, 100092/2022, 100093/2022, 100094/2022, 100095/2022, 100114/2022

31 IN CRL. A.100086/2022 BETWEEN THE INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT REPRESENTED BY DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, PLOT NO. 123, SARAF COLONY, KHANAPUR ROAD SHRADDHA BUILDING TILAKWADI, BELAGAVI PIN. 590006 ...APPELLANT (By Sri. Y.V. RAVIRAJ, ADV) AND 1 . M/S MAGAR AND MAGAR INDIA PARTNERSHIP FIRM OCCUPATION. BUSINESS, OFF.P.B. ROAD, YALLAPUR ONI HUBLI.PIN.580028 REP.BY MANAGING PARTNER SHRI. ABBAS

M/S HUBLI ELECTRICITY SUPPLY CO. vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

In the result, the appeals are disposed of as

Bench: JOHN MICHAEL CUNHA,S.SUJATHA

condoned by the appellate authority and the same came : 11 : to be rejected in further appeal before the ITAT. The assessee was under a bonafide impression that a fresh order of the assessing authority shall be passed before further course of action is taken. However, when the consequential order was passed by the assessing officer, an appeal was filed before

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M/S GOLF VIEW HOMES LTD.,

Bench: P.S.DINESH KUMAR,JAYANT PATEL

31) of the appellate order. “Moreover the appellant company has continued to construct one building after another and also acquiring property rights in M/s.Diamond District, M/s.Platinum City and M/s.India Builders Association. So the appellant’s activity as a developer and contractor is well organized and continuous.” Similar findings are also recorded at pages 31/32 and 33 of the appellate order

SARVODAYA EDUCATION TRUST vs. THE UNION OF INDIA

Bench: The Hon'Ble Mr. Justice Ashok B. Hinchigeri

31. Sri D.Leelakrishnan, the learned counsel for the respondent No.4 in W.P.No.38497/2014 submits that the Bombay High Court in its judgment in the case of PRESIDENT/SECRETARY, VIDARBHA YOUTH WELFARE INSTITUTION (SOCIETY), AMRAVATI v. PRADIPKUMAR AND OTHERS reported in 2012 LLR 417 has held that in view of amendment of 2009, a teacher is not only an employee under

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M/S GOLF VIEW HOMES LTD

Bench: P.S.DINESH KUMAR,JAYANT PATEL

31) of the appellate order. “Moreover the appellant company has continued to construct one building after another and also acquiring property rights in M/s.Diamond District, M/s.Platinum City 9 and M/s.India Builders Association. So the appellant’s activity as a developer and contractor is well organized and continuous.” Similar findings are also recorded at pages 31/32 and 33 of the appellate

M/S PROCESS PUMPS (I) PVT LTD vs. UNION OF INDIA

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice Aravind Kumar

31 of the judgment, the Court held as under: (SCC pp.380-81, paras 31-32) "The traditional view that there must be actual quid pro quo for a fee has undergone a sea change subsequent to decision in Kewal Krishan Puri vs. State Of Punjab (AIR 1980 SC 1008). Correlationship between the levy and the services rendered/expected is one of general

M/S MAHRISHI MELTCHEMS PRIVATE LIMITED vs. UNION OF INDIA

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice Aravind Kumar

31 of the judgment, the Court held as under: (SCC pp.380-81, paras 31-32) "The traditional view that there must be actual quid pro quo for a fee has undergone a sea change subsequent to decision in Kewal Krishan Puri vs. State Of Punjab (AIR 1980 SC 1008). Correlationship between the levy and the services rendered/expected is one of general

SRI. FATHERAJ SINGHVI vs. UNION OF INDIA

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice Aravind Kumar

31 of the judgment, the Court held as under: (SCC pp.380-81, paras 31-32) "The traditional view that there must be actual quid pro quo for a fee has undergone a sea change subsequent to decision in Kewal Krishan Puri vs. State Of Punjab (AIR 1980 SC 1008). Correlationship between the levy and the services rendered/expected is one of general

ECOLE SOLUTIONS PVT LTD vs. UNION OF INDIA

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice Aravind Kumar

31 of the judgment, the Court held as under: (SCC pp.380-81, paras 31-32) "The traditional view that there must be actual quid pro quo for a fee has undergone a sea change subsequent to decision in Kewal Krishan Puri vs. State Of Punjab (AIR 1980 SC 1008). Correlationship between the levy and the services rendered/expected is one of general

M/S TEACHERS CO OPERATIVE BANK vs. UNION OF INDIA

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice Aravind Kumar

31 of the judgment, the Court held as under: (SCC pp.380-81, paras 31-32) "The traditional view that there must be actual quid pro quo for a fee has undergone a sea change subsequent to decision in Kewal Krishan Puri vs. State Of Punjab (AIR 1980 SC 1008). Correlationship between the levy and the services rendered/expected is one of general

M/S TEE ENN ENTERPRISES vs. UNION OF INDIA

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice Aravind Kumar

31 of the judgment, the Court held as under: (SCC pp.380-81, paras 31-32) "The traditional view that there must be actual quid pro quo for a fee has undergone a sea change subsequent to decision in Kewal Krishan Puri vs. State Of Punjab (AIR 1980 SC 1008). Correlationship between the levy and the services rendered/expected is one of general

M/S NEW MEDIA COMPANY vs. UNION OF INDIA

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice Aravind Kumar

31 of the judgment, the Court held as under: (SCC pp.380-81, paras 31-32) "The traditional view that there must be actual quid pro quo for a fee has undergone a sea change subsequent to decision in Kewal Krishan Puri vs. State Of Punjab (AIR 1980 SC 1008). Correlationship between the levy and the services rendered/expected is one of general

DR V. NARAYANASWAMY vs. UNION OF INDIA

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice Aravind Kumar

31 of the judgment, the Court held as under: (SCC pp.380-81, paras 31-32) "The traditional view that there must be actual quid pro quo for a fee has undergone a sea change subsequent to decision in Kewal Krishan Puri vs. State Of Punjab (AIR 1980 SC 1008). Correlationship between the levy and the services rendered/expected is one of general

M/S. LAKSHMINIRMAN BANGALORE PVT.LTD vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice Aravind Kumar

31 of the judgment, the Court held as under: (SCC pp.380-81, paras 31-32) "The traditional view that there must be actual quid pro quo for a fee has undergone a sea change subsequent to decision in Kewal Krishan Puri vs. State Of Punjab (AIR 1980 SC 1008). Correlationship between the levy and the services rendered/expected is one of general

M/S CATHODIC CONTROL CO LTD vs. UNION OF INDIA

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice Aravind Kumar

31 of the judgment, the Court held as under: (SCC pp.380-81, paras 31-32) "The traditional view that there must be actual quid pro quo for a fee has undergone a sea change subsequent to decision in Kewal Krishan Puri vs. State Of Punjab (AIR 1980 SC 1008). Correlationship between the levy and the services rendered/expected is one of general

MINTENT SERVICED APARTMENTS PVT LTD., vs. UNION OF INDIA

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice Aravind Kumar

31 of the judgment, the Court held as under: (SCC pp.380-81, paras 31-32) "The traditional view that there must be actual quid pro quo for a fee has undergone a sea change subsequent to decision in Kewal Krishan Puri vs. State Of Punjab (AIR 1980 SC 1008). Correlationship between the levy and the services rendered/expected is one of general