THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S GOLDMAN SACHS SERVICES PVT LTD

Bench: The Hon'Ble Mr. Justice V. Srishananda Civil Revision Petition No.29/2019 Between

7) as excluding the decision on his competence and the locus standi of the party which seeks to invoke his jurisdiction to appoint an arbitrator. Viewed from that angle, the decision on all these aspects rendered by the Chief Justice would 47 attain finality and it is obvious that the decision on these aspects could be taken only after notice

REKHA KRISHNARAJ vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

The appeal is dismissed accordingly

Bench: B.MANOHAR,N.KUMAR

7-08-2009 passed in ITA.No.1009/Bang/2007, for the Assessment Year 1997-98. 2 This ITA coming on for admission this day, N KUMAR J, delivered the following: JUDGMENT The assessee has preferred this appeal challenging the order passed by the Tribunal dismissing her appeal negativing her contentions that Section 68

AJITH U SHENOY vs. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY

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

Section 68[3][ca] of the Act requires examination which has not been properly considered and addressed by the Authority. The petitions cannot be rejected at the threshold on the ground of alternative remedy. 17. At this juncture, it would be apt to refer to the Judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of ‘STATE

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

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

Section 68[3][ca] of the Act requires examination which has not been properly considered and addressed by the Authority. The petitions cannot be rejected at the threshold on the ground of alternative remedy. 17. At this juncture, it would be apt to refer to the Judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of ‘STATE

THE PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, vs. M/S THE HAMLET,

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

7 Crores made under Section 68 of the Act, holding that the transaction entered into by the assessee was genuine

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

Section 33A of RP Act and 106 he has committed corrupt practice of bribery as contemplated under Sections 123(1)(A), 123(1)(B), 123(7), 123(7)(b), 123(vii)(d), 123(7)(h) and Section 123(8), 123(3), 3A and 123(6) of R.P. Act ? The petitioner in E.P. No.2/2019 has contended that respondent

SHRI B.S. YEDDYURAPPA vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mrs.Justice Rathnakala

7)]. The independent nature of investigation conducted by the Police Wing of Lokayuktha fell for consideration of the Division Bench of this Court in State of Karnataka, by Chief Secretary and Others –vs- Basavaraj Guddapa Maliger reported in 2003 Crl.LJ 4252. Referring to the judgments of C.Rangaswamaiah and others –vs- Karnataka Lokayuktha and others ((1998)6 SCC 66) and State

SHRI B.S. YEDDYURAPPA vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mrs.Justice Rathnakala

7)]. The independent nature of investigation conducted by the Police Wing of Lokayuktha fell for consideration of the Division Bench of this Court in State of Karnataka, by Chief Secretary and Others –vs- Basavaraj Guddapa Maliger reported in 2003 Crl.LJ 4252. Referring to the judgments of C.Rangaswamaiah and others –vs- Karnataka Lokayuktha and others ((1998)6 SCC 66) and State

SHRI B.S. YEDDYURAPPA vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mrs.Justice Rathnakala

7)]. The independent nature of investigation conducted by the Police Wing of Lokayuktha fell for consideration of the Division Bench of this Court in State of Karnataka, by Chief Secretary and Others –vs- Basavaraj Guddapa Maliger reported in 2003 Crl.LJ 4252. Referring to the judgments of C.Rangaswamaiah and others –vs- Karnataka Lokayuktha and others ((1998)6 SCC 66) and State

SHRI B.S. YEDDYURAPPA vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mrs.Justice Rathnakala

7)]. The independent nature of investigation conducted by the Police Wing of Lokayuktha fell for consideration of the Division Bench of this Court in State of Karnataka, by Chief Secretary and Others –vs- Basavaraj Guddapa Maliger reported in 2003 Crl.LJ 4252. Referring to the judgments of C.Rangaswamaiah and others –vs- Karnataka Lokayuktha and others ((1998)6 SCC 66) and State

SHRI B.S. YEDDYURAPPA vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mrs.Justice Rathnakala

7)]. The independent nature of investigation conducted by the Police Wing of Lokayuktha fell for consideration of the Division Bench of this Court in State of Karnataka, by Chief Secretary and Others –vs- Basavaraj Guddapa Maliger reported in 2003 Crl.LJ 4252. Referring to the judgments of C.Rangaswamaiah and others –vs- Karnataka Lokayuktha and others ((1998)6 SCC 66) and State

SHRI B.S. YEDDYURAPPA vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mrs.Justice Rathnakala

7)]. The independent nature of investigation conducted by the Police Wing of Lokayuktha fell for consideration of the Division Bench of this Court in State of Karnataka, by Chief Secretary and Others –vs- Basavaraj Guddapa Maliger reported in 2003 Crl.LJ 4252. Referring to the judgments of C.Rangaswamaiah and others –vs- Karnataka Lokayuktha and others ((1998)6 SCC 66) and State

SHRI B.S. YEDDYURAPPA vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mrs.Justice Rathnakala

7)]. The independent nature of investigation conducted by the Police Wing of Lokayuktha fell for consideration of the Division Bench of this Court in State of Karnataka, by Chief Secretary and Others –vs- Basavaraj Guddapa Maliger reported in 2003 Crl.LJ 4252. Referring to the judgments of C.Rangaswamaiah and others –vs- Karnataka Lokayuktha and others ((1998)6 SCC 66) and State

SHRI B.S. YEDDYURAPPA vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mrs.Justice Rathnakala

7)]. The independent nature of investigation conducted by the Police Wing of Lokayuktha fell for consideration of the Division Bench of this Court in State of Karnataka, by Chief Secretary and Others –vs- Basavaraj Guddapa Maliger reported in 2003 Crl.LJ 4252. Referring to the judgments of C.Rangaswamaiah and others –vs- Karnataka Lokayuktha and others ((1998)6 SCC 66) and State

SHRI B.S. YEDDYURAPPA vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mrs.Justice Rathnakala

7)]. The independent nature of investigation conducted by the Police Wing of Lokayuktha fell for consideration of the Division Bench of this Court in State of Karnataka, by Chief Secretary and Others –vs- Basavaraj Guddapa Maliger reported in 2003 Crl.LJ 4252. Referring to the judgments of C.Rangaswamaiah and others –vs- Karnataka Lokayuktha and others ((1998)6 SCC 66) and State

SHRI B S YEDDYURAPPA vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mrs.Justice Rathnakala

7)]. The independent nature of investigation conducted by the Police Wing of Lokayuktha fell for consideration of the Division Bench of this Court in State of Karnataka, by Chief Secretary and Others –vs- Basavaraj Guddapa Maliger reported in 2003 Crl.LJ 4252. Referring to the judgments of C.Rangaswamaiah and others –vs- Karnataka Lokayuktha and others ((1998)6 SCC 66) and State

SHRI B.S. YEDDYURAPPA vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mrs.Justice Rathnakala

7)]. The independent nature of investigation conducted by the Police Wing of Lokayuktha fell for consideration of the Division Bench of this Court in State of Karnataka, by Chief Secretary and Others –vs- Basavaraj Guddapa Maliger reported in 2003 Crl.LJ 4252. Referring to the judgments of C.Rangaswamaiah and others –vs- Karnataka Lokayuktha and others ((1998)6 SCC 66) and State

SHRI B.S. YEDDYURAPPA vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mrs.Justice Rathnakala

7)]. The independent nature of investigation conducted by the Police Wing of Lokayuktha fell for consideration of the Division Bench of this Court in State of Karnataka, by Chief Secretary and Others –vs- Basavaraj Guddapa Maliger reported in 2003 Crl.LJ 4252. Referring to the judgments of C.Rangaswamaiah and others –vs- Karnataka Lokayuktha and others ((1998)6 SCC 66) and State