ERAPPA vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

Bench: The Hon'Ble Mr Justice M.G.S. Kamal Writ Petition No. 9257 Of 2014 (Sc/St) Between:

40 YEARS R/O CHANNENAHALLI ESTATE KADURU TALUK CHIKKAMGALURU DISTRICT …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. VENKATASATHYA NARAYANA, HCGP FOR R1 & R2; SRI. A.G. SHIVANNA, SR. ADVOCATE FOR CHANDRASHEKAR, ADVOCATE FOR R3 (A TO H) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER CHIKMAGALORE, DATED.07.02.89 VIDE

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 COMMISSONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SRI PRAKASH B NICHANI

Bench: B.MANOHAR,VINEET SARAN

40 YEARS. R 2 2. SHIVANGI, D/O PRAKASH P NICHANI AGED 15 YEARS. SINCE MINOR REPRESENTED BY NATURAL GUARDIAN, SMT.NISHA NICHANI. 3. AYESHA, D/O PRAKASH B NICHANI AGED 13 YEARS. SINCE MINOR REPRESENTED BY NATURAL GUARDIAN, SMT.NISHA NICHANI. (AS PER COURT ORDER DATED DATED 8.7.2014) .. RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. A. SHANKAR, ADV.) THIS ITA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260A OF INCOME

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

40 PARTNERSHIP FIRM OCCUPATION. BUSINESS, OFF.P.B. ROAD, YALLAPUR ONI HUBLI.PIN.580028 REPRESENTED BY MANAGING PARTNER SHRI FAKRUDDIN A MAGAR. 2 . SHRI. FAKRUDDIN A MAGAR AGED 70 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS MANAGING PARTNER M/S UPKAR AND UPKAR (INDIA) OFF.P.B. ROAD, YELLAPUR ONI HUBLI. PIN. 580028 3 . JUZAR A MAGAR AGED 70 YEARS OCCUPATION. BUSINESS PARTNER M/S UPKAR AND UPKAR (INDIA) OFF.P.B. ROAD

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S GULBARGA ELECTRICITY SUPPLY COMPANY LTD.

Accordingly, appeal of Revenue is dismissed

Bench: B.VEERAPPA,VINEET KOTHARI

40(a)(ia), 194 C and 194J and after following the decision of the co-ordinate bench of the Tribunal in identical circumstances in the case of Bangalore Electricity Supply Company vs. ITO (TDS) in ITA No.530 to 535/Bang/2011 and other cases, proceeded to dismiss the Revenue’s appeal, upholding the order passed by the CIT (Appeals) insofar

SARVODAYA EDUCATION TRUST vs. THE UNION OF INDIA

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

40 JUSTICE S.R.TENDOLKAR & OTHERS reported in AIR 1958 SC 538 and PEOPLE’S UNION FOR CIVIL LIBERTIES v. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS reported in (2004) 2 SCC 476. 42. An Act of legislature can be struck down only on two grounds – (i) lack of legislative competence and (ii) violation of fundamental rights or any other provisions of the Constitution

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S ABBEY BUSINESS SERVICES

In the result, we do not find any merit in the appeal

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

section 40(a)(i) of the Act?" 2. When the matter was taken up today, learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the aforesaid substantial questions of law have already been answered in favour of the assessee by judgment dated 01.12.2020 passed in ITA Nos.214/2014 and 215/2014. It is also urged that the appeal filed by the revenue is barred

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S ABBEY BUSINESS SERVICES

In the result, we do not find any merit in the appeal

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

section 40(a)(i) of the Act?" 2. When the matter was taken up today, learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the aforesaid substantial questions of law have already been answered in favour of the assessee by judgment dated 01.12.2020 passed in ITA Nos.214/2014 and 215/2014. It is also urged that the appeal filed by the revenue is barred

ADITHYA BIZORP SOLUTIONS INDIA PVT LTD vs. UNION OF INDIA

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice Aravind Kumar

40 S/O SRI VASU SHETTY, R/AT 16-58B, CHANDRAMAA, ANANATHNAGAR, FIRST STAGE, MANIPAL, UDUPI-576 101. 8. SRI BALAKRISHNA I, (PARTNER :SUMUKH SERVICES) AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, S/O. SRI GANAPATHI NAYAK, R/AT "SHAIPRAJA NILAYA", PAREEKA POST, PARKALA, UDUPI-576 109. 9. MS. HELEN V. SALINS, (HEADMISTRESS:CHRISTIAN HIGH SCHOOL), AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, D/O. MR. LEMUEL SALINS, R/AT "NEIL

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

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice Aravind Kumar

40 S/O SRI VASU SHETTY, R/AT 16-58B, CHANDRAMAA, ANANATHNAGAR, FIRST STAGE, MANIPAL, UDUPI-576 101. 8. SRI BALAKRISHNA I, (PARTNER :SUMUKH SERVICES) AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, S/O. SRI GANAPATHI NAYAK, R/AT "SHAIPRAJA NILAYA", PAREEKA POST, PARKALA, UDUPI-576 109. 9. MS. HELEN V. SALINS, (HEADMISTRESS:CHRISTIAN HIGH SCHOOL), AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, D/O. MR. LEMUEL SALINS, R/AT "NEIL

SYNDICATE BANK vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice Aravind Kumar

40 S/O SRI VASU SHETTY, R/AT 16-58B, CHANDRAMAA, ANANATHNAGAR, FIRST STAGE, MANIPAL, UDUPI-576 101. 8. SRI BALAKRISHNA I, (PARTNER :SUMUKH SERVICES) AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, S/O. SRI GANAPATHI NAYAK, R/AT "SHAIPRAJA NILAYA", PAREEKA POST, PARKALA, UDUPI-576 109. 9. MS. HELEN V. SALINS, (HEADMISTRESS:CHRISTIAN HIGH SCHOOL), AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, D/O. MR. LEMUEL SALINS, R/AT "NEIL

M/S HOTEL FISHLAND vs. UNION OF INDIA

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice Aravind Kumar

40 S/O SRI VASU SHETTY, R/AT 16-58B, CHANDRAMAA, ANANATHNAGAR, FIRST STAGE, MANIPAL, UDUPI-576 101. 8. SRI BALAKRISHNA I, (PARTNER :SUMUKH SERVICES) AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, S/O. SRI GANAPATHI NAYAK, R/AT "SHAIPRAJA NILAYA", PAREEKA POST, PARKALA, UDUPI-576 109. 9. MS. HELEN V. SALINS, (HEADMISTRESS:CHRISTIAN HIGH SCHOOL), AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, D/O. MR. LEMUEL SALINS, R/AT "NEIL

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

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice Aravind Kumar

40 S/O SRI VASU SHETTY, R/AT 16-58B, CHANDRAMAA, ANANATHNAGAR, FIRST STAGE, MANIPAL, UDUPI-576 101. 8. SRI BALAKRISHNA I, (PARTNER :SUMUKH SERVICES) AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, S/O. SRI GANAPATHI NAYAK, R/AT "SHAIPRAJA NILAYA", PAREEKA POST, PARKALA, UDUPI-576 109. 9. MS. HELEN V. SALINS, (HEADMISTRESS:CHRISTIAN HIGH SCHOOL), AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, D/O. MR. LEMUEL SALINS, R/AT "NEIL

M/S PRODIGY TECHNOVATIONS PVT LTD vs. UNION OF INDIA

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice Aravind Kumar

40 S/O SRI VASU SHETTY, R/AT 16-58B, CHANDRAMAA, ANANATHNAGAR, FIRST STAGE, MANIPAL, UDUPI-576 101. 8. SRI BALAKRISHNA I, (PARTNER :SUMUKH SERVICES) AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, S/O. SRI GANAPATHI NAYAK, R/AT "SHAIPRAJA NILAYA", PAREEKA POST, PARKALA, UDUPI-576 109. 9. MS. HELEN V. SALINS, (HEADMISTRESS:CHRISTIAN HIGH SCHOOL), AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, D/O. MR. LEMUEL SALINS, R/AT "NEIL

M/S. K K BROTHERS vs. UNION OF INDIA

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice Aravind Kumar

40 S/O SRI VASU SHETTY, R/AT 16-58B, CHANDRAMAA, ANANATHNAGAR, FIRST STAGE, MANIPAL, UDUPI-576 101. 8. SRI BALAKRISHNA I, (PARTNER :SUMUKH SERVICES) AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, S/O. SRI GANAPATHI NAYAK, R/AT "SHAIPRAJA NILAYA", PAREEKA POST, PARKALA, UDUPI-576 109. 9. MS. HELEN V. SALINS, (HEADMISTRESS:CHRISTIAN HIGH SCHOOL), AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, D/O. MR. LEMUEL SALINS, R/AT "NEIL

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

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice Aravind Kumar

40 S/O SRI VASU SHETTY, R/AT 16-58B, CHANDRAMAA, ANANATHNAGAR, FIRST STAGE, MANIPAL, UDUPI-576 101. 8. SRI BALAKRISHNA I, (PARTNER :SUMUKH SERVICES) AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, S/O. SRI GANAPATHI NAYAK, R/AT "SHAIPRAJA NILAYA", PAREEKA POST, PARKALA, UDUPI-576 109. 9. MS. HELEN V. SALINS, (HEADMISTRESS:CHRISTIAN HIGH SCHOOL), AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, D/O. MR. LEMUEL SALINS, R/AT "NEIL

DR V. NARAYANASWAMY vs. UNION OF INDIA

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice Aravind Kumar

40 S/O SRI VASU SHETTY, R/AT 16-58B, CHANDRAMAA, ANANATHNAGAR, FIRST STAGE, MANIPAL, UDUPI-576 101. 8. SRI BALAKRISHNA I, (PARTNER :SUMUKH SERVICES) AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, S/O. SRI GANAPATHI NAYAK, R/AT "SHAIPRAJA NILAYA", PAREEKA POST, PARKALA, UDUPI-576 109. 9. MS. HELEN V. SALINS, (HEADMISTRESS:CHRISTIAN HIGH SCHOOL), AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, D/O. MR. LEMUEL SALINS, R/AT "NEIL

ECOLE SOLUTIONS PVT LTD vs. UNION OF INDIA

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice Aravind Kumar

40 S/O SRI VASU SHETTY, R/AT 16-58B, CHANDRAMAA, ANANATHNAGAR, FIRST STAGE, MANIPAL, UDUPI-576 101. 8. SRI BALAKRISHNA I, (PARTNER :SUMUKH SERVICES) AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, S/O. SRI GANAPATHI NAYAK, R/AT "SHAIPRAJA NILAYA", PAREEKA POST, PARKALA, UDUPI-576 109. 9. MS. HELEN V. SALINS, (HEADMISTRESS:CHRISTIAN HIGH SCHOOL), AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, D/O. MR. LEMUEL SALINS, R/AT "NEIL