THE HANUMAN TRANSPORT CO PVT LTD vs. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mrs.Justice S.Sujatha

68[3][ca] of the Act, the Regional Transport Authority and State Transport Authority has no jurisdiction to entertain the applications and applicants moving the applications for - 19 - permit of stage carriages not specified in the routes are to be rejected not being in conformity with Section 72 and the proviso thereof. It was further submitted that this order

AJITH U SHENOY vs. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mrs.Justice S.Sujatha

68[3][ca] of the Act, the Regional Transport Authority and State Transport Authority has no jurisdiction to entertain the applications and applicants moving the applications for - 19 - permit of stage carriages not specified in the routes are to be rejected not being in conformity with Section 72 and the proviso thereof. It was further submitted that this order

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

The appeals stand disposed of, accordingly

Bench: N.KUMAR,B.SREENIVASE GOWDA

14 are not existing in the case of income of STP undertaking and accordingly such income is not liable to be computed under Chapter IV. Therefore, the correct view would be that the relief under Section 10A will have to be given before Chapter IV. The deduction shall be given first and process of computation of “profits and gains

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

The appeals stand disposed of, accordingly

Bench: N.KUMAR,B.SREENIVASE GOWDA

14 are not existing in the case of income of STP undertaking and accordingly such income is not liable to be computed under Chapter IV. Therefore, the correct view would be that the relief under Section 10A will have to be given before Chapter IV. The deduction shall be given first and process of computation of “profits and gains

SHRI NARAYAN RAO HEBRI vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

The appeal stands dismissed

Bench: S.G.PANDIT,K. V. ARAVIND

14,20,100/- as income from other sources under Section 115BBE of the I.T. Act and subjected the same to tax at the rate of 60%. 7.2 The contention of the assessee is that the additional income was admitted in the return on account of coercion exercised during the course of the survey and on the basis

G. SHUBHA DEVI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

Section 68 of the Act to an extent of Rs.5,07,900/-?” 9. Learned Counsel for the Revenue Mr.K V Aravind, however, supported the impugned order of the learned Tribunal, who submits before us that this findings of fact given by the learned Tribunal deserves to be accepted by this Court. 10. Having heard the learned Counsels

M/S ANS CONSTRUCTIONS LTD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mrs.Justice S.Sujatha

14. In the instant case, the assessee paid input tax for the month of June 2006. In the returns filed in July 2006 he did not put forth any claim. He also did not file any revised return within 6 months putting forth the said claim. That is the period prescribed under law under Section

SHRI SURESH KUMAR T JAIN vs. THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER

The appeal is dismissed

Bench: The Hon'Ble Mr. Justice Ravi Malimath

68 of the Act could not have been invoked by the Revenue. It is contended that the list of creditors having been furnished, there is cessation of liability and therefore, the findings recorded by the Assessing Officer and as confirmed by the Tribunal is incorrect. She relies on the judgment of this Court dated 24-3-2016 passed in Income

M/S T T K PRESTIGE LTD vs. THE UNION OF INDIA REPTD BY ITS FINANCE SECRETARY

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice P.B. Bajanthri W.P. No.26037/2005 C/W W.P.No.4464/2007 & W.P.No.27087/2005(It)

68 be introduced. Clause (vi) of Section 17(2) does not occur in depiction to treat anything as a fringe benefit as perquisite which may otherwise not come within its purview. In fact, none of the provisions under Section 17(2) or under the impugned rules deviate from the basis concept of perquisites and fringe benefits as part

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. KENNAMETAL INC,USA

Bench: KRISHNA S DIXIT,RAMACHANDRA D. HUDDAR

14. Sub-section (6) of Section 153 mandates that where an assessment, reassessment, or recomputation is to be made in - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30667-DB WA No. 68

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX GULBARGA vs. M/S MANJUNATHA COTTON AND GINNING FACTORY

The appeals are dismissed

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,N.KUMAR

14 of the Customs Act is a sort of notional valuation inasmuch as the same is done without taking into consideration the actual payment made by the purchaser of imported goods. There was nothing brought on record to show that any payment outside the books of accounts was made by the assessee against purchase or import of tiles from

SAKKUBAI D/O. PARIMALABAI, vs. STATE OF KARNATKA

Bench: ABHAY SHREENIWAS OKA (CJ),RAM MOHAN REDDY

14 2. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, BELLARY. 3. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, KOPPAL. 4. COMMISSIONER, THE HAMPI WORLD HERITAGE AREA MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY, HAMPI, TQ: HOSPET, DIST: BELLARY. 5. ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF INDIA 5TH FLOOR, F WING, KENDRIYA SADAN, KORAMANGALA, BANGALORE – 34. REPRESENTED BY ITS SUPERINTENDING ARCHAEOLOGIST. ... RESPONDENTS (By Sri. A.G. SHIVANNA, AAG A/W SRI. R. DEVDAS

THE KARNATAKA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION vs. THE WORKMEN OF KARNATAKA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT

Appeals are allowed

Bench: N.KUMAR,V.SURI APPA RAO

68 meaning of the word ‘a’ in the context in which it is used in the said Section. 48. The words “a” or “an” and “the” are called Articles. They come before nouns. There are two Articles – a (or an) and the. “a” or “an” is called the Indefinite Article, because it usually leaves indefinite the person or thing

M/S FIDELITY BUSINESS SERVICES INDIA PVT LTD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

14. Mr. Percy Pardiwala, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Appellant- Assessee Company vehemently submitted before us that the Tribunal has exceeded its jurisdiction and vide para 7 of the Order Date of Judgment :23-07-2018 I.T.A.No.512/2017 M/s. Fidelity Business Services India Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, & Anr. 13/86 quoted above, it has unnecessarily

PASCHIM VIBHAG SHIKSHAN MANDAL BIJAGARI vs. THE COMMISSIONER and APPELLATE AUTHORITY

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice Suraj Govindaraj Writ Petition No.101436/2018 (S-Pro) C/W. Writ Petition No.77680/2013 (Gm-Ksr), Writ Petition No.81667/2013 (Gm-R/C) & Writ Petition No.101972/2017 (Gm-R/C)

14 of the Act of 1863 or Section 92 of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908, involves expensive litigation the Court is authorized, on the application of the plaintiff and after the defendant is heard, to direct the defendant either to furnish security for the expenditure incurred or likely to be incurred in bringing and maintaining the suit

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX vs. M/S BOSCH LTD.,

The appeal is dismissed as devoid of

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

14 Parameshwari Bank and he has not produced any documents including the Passbook of the Bank from which he withdrew Rs.35.00 lakhs and paid to the defendants. He also admitted that the advance amount paid to the defendants is shown in the Income Tax records, but in fact, no document has been produced before the Court to prove the same

NIRMALA BAGODI vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice G. Narendar Writ Petition No.41506/2017 (Apmc) C/W Writ Petition No.41507/2017 (Apmc)

14. In its ordinary and primary sense, the term “ family” signifies the collective body of persons living in one house or under one head or manager or one domestic government. In its restricted sense, “ family” would include only parents and their children. It may include even grandchildren and all the persons of the same blood living together. In its broader

SRI CHITURI DURGA RAO vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice G. Narendar Writ Petition No.41506/2017 (Apmc) C/W Writ Petition No.41507/2017 (Apmc)

14. In its ordinary and primary sense, the term “ family” signifies the collective body of persons living in one house or under one head or manager or one domestic government. In its restricted sense, “ family” would include only parents and their children. It may include even grandchildren and all the persons of the same blood living together. In its broader