M/S UNITED TELECOM LTD vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF

Appeals are allowed in part

Bench: S.SUJATHA,JAYANT PATEL

68 73. The evidence on record clearly depicts that in the entire evidence on behalf of the prosecution, none of the witnesses including the wife of the deceased – PW.1, PWs.16, 18, 21 and 31 have stated anything about the involvement of the accused persons with regard to homicidal death of the deceased. Absolutely no material is produced by the prosecution

THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER vs. M/S OBULAPURAM MINING

Bench: K.SOMASHEKAR,UMESH M ADIGA

68,440/- (b) In respect of Helicopter Hiring Charges 72,23,641/- Total adjustments Rs.112,20,92,081/- 7. It is further stated that the draft assessment order came to be passed under section 144C read with Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by adopting the above adjustments to the value of the international transactions

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)

76 ER 637. and it is the safest guide today. Good practical advice on the subject was given about the same time by Plowden in his note (2 Plowd 465) to Eyston v. Studd 2 – (1974) 2 Plowd 463: 75 ER 692. Put into homely metaphor, it is this: A Judge should ask himself the question how, if the makers

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

The appeals stand disposed of, accordingly

Bench: N.KUMAR,B.SREENIVASE GOWDA

68 - 52. Section 10A (1) speaks of “deduction”. The deduction is of profits and gains for a period of ten consecutive assessment years. The said deduction is from the total income of the assessee. Therefore, the total income before allowing the said deduction includes the profits and gains from the business referred to in Section 10A(1). Section

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

The appeals stand disposed of, accordingly

Bench: N.KUMAR,B.SREENIVASE GOWDA

68 - 52. Section 10A (1) speaks of “deduction”. The deduction is of profits and gains for a period of ten consecutive assessment years. The said deduction is from the total income of the assessee. Therefore, the total income before allowing the said deduction includes the profits and gains from the business referred to in Section 10A(1). Section

M/S MYSORE POLYMERS & RUBBER PRODUCTS LTD vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES

In the result, writ appeal No

Bench: D.V.SHYLENDRA KUMAR,B.S.INDRAKALA

68. Submission is that a fiction created for the purpose of section 5[3][a] of the Act cannot be accepted and applied for the charge created under section 6-B of the Act. 69. This argument is an acceptable argument as we find that section 6-B of the Act is governed by the provisos appended

DR M BASAPPA REDDY vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice K.Natarajan Writ Petition No.12915 Of 2021 (Gm-Res)

68, 74, 75, 76 which are as under: "67. Every offence committed by a police officer does not attract Section

DILIPKUMAR vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice Hemant Chandangoudar W.P Nos.108208 -108209 /2016 (La-Res) C/W W.P No.104784/2016, Wp No.106158/2016, W.P No.106159/2016, W.P No.106157/2016, W.P No.107889/2016, W.P Nos.109564 - 109565/2016, W.P No.112114/2017, W.P No.112263/2017, W.P Nos.104989-990/2018, W.P No.106557/2015, W.P Nos.106269-106270/2015, W.P No.103770/2015, W.P No.104783/2016, W.P No.104728/2016, W.P No.104025/2016, W.P No.103548/2016, W.P Nos.103486-103488/2016, W.P No.103319/2016, W.P No.102905/2016, W.P No.103019/2016, W.P No.102904/2016, W.P No.103451/2016, W.P No.103447/2016, W.P No.104785/2016, W.P No.103380/2016, W.P No.101172/2016, W.P No.106558/2015, W.P Nos.100431-100435/2016, W.P Nos.103479-103481/2016, W.P Nos.103483-103484/2016, W.P No.103485/2016 & W.P No.103482/2016

68 1.31 The property bearing Sy.No.27/6B1 measuring 1 guntas 4.75 anas situated at Lakkammanahalli Dharwad belonging to the petitioner was acquired for the purpose of the BRTS project. However, payment of compensation was denied on the ground that the acquired land was earmarked as road margin area in the single layout plan approved by the Hubli-Dharwad Urban Development

GIRISH S/O SHANKARAO CHINCHORE vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice Hemant Chandangoudar W.P Nos.108208 -108209 /2016 (La-Res) C/W W.P No.104784/2016, Wp No.106158/2016, W.P No.106159/2016, W.P No.106157/2016, W.P No.107889/2016, W.P Nos.109564 - 109565/2016, W.P No.112114/2017, W.P No.112263/2017, W.P Nos.104989-990/2018, W.P No.106557/2015, W.P Nos.106269-106270/2015, W.P No.103770/2015, W.P No.104783/2016, W.P No.104728/2016, W.P No.104025/2016, W.P No.103548/2016, W.P Nos.103486-103488/2016, W.P No.103319/2016, W.P No.102905/2016, W.P No.103019/2016, W.P No.102904/2016, W.P No.103451/2016, W.P No.103447/2016, W.P No.104785/2016, W.P No.103380/2016, W.P No.101172/2016, W.P No.106558/2015, W.P Nos.100431-100435/2016, W.P Nos.103479-103481/2016, W.P Nos.103483-103484/2016, W.P No.103485/2016 & W.P No.103482/2016

68 1.31 The property bearing Sy.No.27/6B1 measuring 1 guntas 4.75 anas situated at Lakkammanahalli Dharwad belonging to the petitioner was acquired for the purpose of the BRTS project. However, payment of compensation was denied on the ground that the acquired land was earmarked as road margin area in the single layout plan approved by the Hubli-Dharwad Urban Development

SRI. SHASHIDHAR vs. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITIONI OFFICER

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice Hemant Chandangoudar W.P Nos.108208 -108209 /2016 (La-Res) C/W W.P No.104784/2016, Wp No.106158/2016, W.P No.106159/2016, W.P No.106157/2016, W.P No.107889/2016, W.P Nos.109564 - 109565/2016, W.P No.112114/2017, W.P No.112263/2017, W.P Nos.104989-990/2018, W.P No.106557/2015, W.P Nos.106269-106270/2015, W.P No.103770/2015, W.P No.104783/2016, W.P No.104728/2016, W.P No.104025/2016, W.P No.103548/2016, W.P Nos.103486-103488/2016, W.P No.103319/2016, W.P No.102905/2016, W.P No.103019/2016, W.P No.102904/2016, W.P No.103451/2016, W.P No.103447/2016, W.P No.104785/2016, W.P No.103380/2016, W.P No.101172/2016, W.P No.106558/2015, W.P Nos.100431-100435/2016, W.P Nos.103479-103481/2016, W.P Nos.103483-103484/2016, W.P No.103485/2016 & W.P No.103482/2016

68 1.31 The property bearing Sy.No.27/6B1 measuring 1 guntas 4.75 anas situated at Lakkammanahalli Dharwad belonging to the petitioner was acquired for the purpose of the BRTS project. However, payment of compensation was denied on the ground that the acquired land was earmarked as road margin area in the single layout plan approved by the Hubli-Dharwad Urban Development

MAHAMMAD GOUSE S/O JAFARSAB SAVANUR, vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice Hemant Chandangoudar W.P Nos.108208 -108209 /2016 (La-Res) C/W W.P No.104784/2016, Wp No.106158/2016, W.P No.106159/2016, W.P No.106157/2016, W.P No.107889/2016, W.P Nos.109564 - 109565/2016, W.P No.112114/2017, W.P No.112263/2017, W.P Nos.104989-990/2018, W.P No.106557/2015, W.P Nos.106269-106270/2015, W.P No.103770/2015, W.P No.104783/2016, W.P No.104728/2016, W.P No.104025/2016, W.P No.103548/2016, W.P Nos.103486-103488/2016, W.P No.103319/2016, W.P No.102905/2016, W.P No.103019/2016, W.P No.102904/2016, W.P No.103451/2016, W.P No.103447/2016, W.P No.104785/2016, W.P No.103380/2016, W.P No.101172/2016, W.P No.106558/2015, W.P Nos.100431-100435/2016, W.P Nos.103479-103481/2016, W.P Nos.103483-103484/2016, W.P No.103485/2016 & W.P No.103482/2016

68 1.31 The property bearing Sy.No.27/6B1 measuring 1 guntas 4.75 anas situated at Lakkammanahalli Dharwad belonging to the petitioner was acquired for the purpose of the BRTS project. However, payment of compensation was denied on the ground that the acquired land was earmarked as road margin area in the single layout plan approved by the Hubli-Dharwad Urban Development

CHAMANSAB S/O ALLABHKSHA PATHAN vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice Hemant Chandangoudar W.P Nos.108208 -108209 /2016 (La-Res) C/W W.P No.104784/2016, Wp No.106158/2016, W.P No.106159/2016, W.P No.106157/2016, W.P No.107889/2016, W.P Nos.109564 - 109565/2016, W.P No.112114/2017, W.P No.112263/2017, W.P Nos.104989-990/2018, W.P No.106557/2015, W.P Nos.106269-106270/2015, W.P No.103770/2015, W.P No.104783/2016, W.P No.104728/2016, W.P No.104025/2016, W.P No.103548/2016, W.P Nos.103486-103488/2016, W.P No.103319/2016, W.P No.102905/2016, W.P No.103019/2016, W.P No.102904/2016, W.P No.103451/2016, W.P No.103447/2016, W.P No.104785/2016, W.P No.103380/2016, W.P No.101172/2016, W.P No.106558/2015, W.P Nos.100431-100435/2016, W.P Nos.103479-103481/2016, W.P Nos.103483-103484/2016, W.P No.103485/2016 & W.P No.103482/2016

68 1.31 The property bearing Sy.No.27/6B1 measuring 1 guntas 4.75 anas situated at Lakkammanahalli Dharwad belonging to the petitioner was acquired for the purpose of the BRTS project. However, payment of compensation was denied on the ground that the acquired land was earmarked as road margin area in the single layout plan approved by the Hubli-Dharwad Urban Development

M.R. SATHAYANARAYAN AKALWADI vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice Hemant Chandangoudar W.P Nos.108208 -108209 /2016 (La-Res) C/W W.P No.104784/2016, Wp No.106158/2016, W.P No.106159/2016, W.P No.106157/2016, W.P No.107889/2016, W.P Nos.109564 - 109565/2016, W.P No.112114/2017, W.P No.112263/2017, W.P Nos.104989-990/2018, W.P No.106557/2015, W.P Nos.106269-106270/2015, W.P No.103770/2015, W.P No.104783/2016, W.P No.104728/2016, W.P No.104025/2016, W.P No.103548/2016, W.P Nos.103486-103488/2016, W.P No.103319/2016, W.P No.102905/2016, W.P No.103019/2016, W.P No.102904/2016, W.P No.103451/2016, W.P No.103447/2016, W.P No.104785/2016, W.P No.103380/2016, W.P No.101172/2016, W.P No.106558/2015, W.P Nos.100431-100435/2016, W.P Nos.103479-103481/2016, W.P Nos.103483-103484/2016, W.P No.103485/2016 & W.P No.103482/2016

68 1.31 The property bearing Sy.No.27/6B1 measuring 1 guntas 4.75 anas situated at Lakkammanahalli Dharwad belonging to the petitioner was acquired for the purpose of the BRTS project. However, payment of compensation was denied on the ground that the acquired land was earmarked as road margin area in the single layout plan approved by the Hubli-Dharwad Urban Development

DHARWAD, HAVERI vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice Hemant Chandangoudar W.P Nos.108208 -108209 /2016 (La-Res) C/W W.P No.104784/2016, Wp No.106158/2016, W.P No.106159/2016, W.P No.106157/2016, W.P No.107889/2016, W.P Nos.109564 - 109565/2016, W.P No.112114/2017, W.P No.112263/2017, W.P Nos.104989-990/2018, W.P No.106557/2015, W.P Nos.106269-106270/2015, W.P No.103770/2015, W.P No.104783/2016, W.P No.104728/2016, W.P No.104025/2016, W.P No.103548/2016, W.P Nos.103486-103488/2016, W.P No.103319/2016, W.P No.102905/2016, W.P No.103019/2016, W.P No.102904/2016, W.P No.103451/2016, W.P No.103447/2016, W.P No.104785/2016, W.P No.103380/2016, W.P No.101172/2016, W.P No.106558/2015, W.P Nos.100431-100435/2016, W.P Nos.103479-103481/2016, W.P Nos.103483-103484/2016, W.P No.103485/2016 & W.P No.103482/2016

68 1.31 The property bearing Sy.No.27/6B1 measuring 1 guntas 4.75 anas situated at Lakkammanahalli Dharwad belonging to the petitioner was acquired for the purpose of the BRTS project. However, payment of compensation was denied on the ground that the acquired land was earmarked as road margin area in the single layout plan approved by the Hubli-Dharwad Urban Development

SRI.ARUN VENKANNA NAVALI, vs. HUBBALLI DHARWAD MUNICIPAL CORPORATION,

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice Hemant Chandangoudar W.P Nos.108208 -108209 /2016 (La-Res) C/W W.P No.104784/2016, Wp No.106158/2016, W.P No.106159/2016, W.P No.106157/2016, W.P No.107889/2016, W.P Nos.109564 - 109565/2016, W.P No.112114/2017, W.P No.112263/2017, W.P Nos.104989-990/2018, W.P No.106557/2015, W.P Nos.106269-106270/2015, W.P No.103770/2015, W.P No.104783/2016, W.P No.104728/2016, W.P No.104025/2016, W.P No.103548/2016, W.P Nos.103486-103488/2016, W.P No.103319/2016, W.P No.102905/2016, W.P No.103019/2016, W.P No.102904/2016, W.P No.103451/2016, W.P No.103447/2016, W.P No.104785/2016, W.P No.103380/2016, W.P No.101172/2016, W.P No.106558/2015, W.P Nos.100431-100435/2016, W.P Nos.103479-103481/2016, W.P Nos.103483-103484/2016, W.P No.103485/2016 & W.P No.103482/2016

68 1.31 The property bearing Sy.No.27/6B1 measuring 1 guntas 4.75 anas situated at Lakkammanahalli Dharwad belonging to the petitioner was acquired for the purpose of the BRTS project. However, payment of compensation was denied on the ground that the acquired land was earmarked as road margin area in the single layout plan approved by the Hubli-Dharwad Urban Development

SMT.RUKMINI @ RUKMINIBAI vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice Hemant Chandangoudar W.P Nos.108208 -108209 /2016 (La-Res) C/W W.P No.104784/2016, Wp No.106158/2016, W.P No.106159/2016, W.P No.106157/2016, W.P No.107889/2016, W.P Nos.109564 - 109565/2016, W.P No.112114/2017, W.P No.112263/2017, W.P Nos.104989-990/2018, W.P No.106557/2015, W.P Nos.106269-106270/2015, W.P No.103770/2015, W.P No.104783/2016, W.P No.104728/2016, W.P No.104025/2016, W.P No.103548/2016, W.P Nos.103486-103488/2016, W.P No.103319/2016, W.P No.102905/2016, W.P No.103019/2016, W.P No.102904/2016, W.P No.103451/2016, W.P No.103447/2016, W.P No.104785/2016, W.P No.103380/2016, W.P No.101172/2016, W.P No.106558/2015, W.P Nos.100431-100435/2016, W.P Nos.103479-103481/2016, W.P Nos.103483-103484/2016, W.P No.103485/2016 & W.P No.103482/2016

68 1.31 The property bearing Sy.No.27/6B1 measuring 1 guntas 4.75 anas situated at Lakkammanahalli Dharwad belonging to the petitioner was acquired for the purpose of the BRTS project. However, payment of compensation was denied on the ground that the acquired land was earmarked as road margin area in the single layout plan approved by the Hubli-Dharwad Urban Development

SHRI. DHARMASTALA MANJUNATHESHWARA EDUCATION vs. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice Hemant Chandangoudar W.P Nos.108208 -108209 /2016 (La-Res) C/W W.P No.104784/2016, Wp No.106158/2016, W.P No.106159/2016, W.P No.106157/2016, W.P No.107889/2016, W.P Nos.109564 - 109565/2016, W.P No.112114/2017, W.P No.112263/2017, W.P Nos.104989-990/2018, W.P No.106557/2015, W.P Nos.106269-106270/2015, W.P No.103770/2015, W.P No.104783/2016, W.P No.104728/2016, W.P No.104025/2016, W.P No.103548/2016, W.P Nos.103486-103488/2016, W.P No.103319/2016, W.P No.102905/2016, W.P No.103019/2016, W.P No.102904/2016, W.P No.103451/2016, W.P No.103447/2016, W.P No.104785/2016, W.P No.103380/2016, W.P No.101172/2016, W.P No.106558/2015, W.P Nos.100431-100435/2016, W.P Nos.103479-103481/2016, W.P Nos.103483-103484/2016, W.P No.103485/2016 & W.P No.103482/2016

68 1.31 The property bearing Sy.No.27/6B1 measuring 1 guntas 4.75 anas situated at Lakkammanahalli Dharwad belonging to the petitioner was acquired for the purpose of the BRTS project. However, payment of compensation was denied on the ground that the acquired land was earmarked as road margin area in the single layout plan approved by the Hubli-Dharwad Urban Development

PREMABAI W/O MOHAN GAONKAR vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice Hemant Chandangoudar W.P Nos.108208 -108209 /2016 (La-Res) C/W W.P No.104784/2016, Wp No.106158/2016, W.P No.106159/2016, W.P No.106157/2016, W.P No.107889/2016, W.P Nos.109564 - 109565/2016, W.P No.112114/2017, W.P No.112263/2017, W.P Nos.104989-990/2018, W.P No.106557/2015, W.P Nos.106269-106270/2015, W.P No.103770/2015, W.P No.104783/2016, W.P No.104728/2016, W.P No.104025/2016, W.P No.103548/2016, W.P Nos.103486-103488/2016, W.P No.103319/2016, W.P No.102905/2016, W.P No.103019/2016, W.P No.102904/2016, W.P No.103451/2016, W.P No.103447/2016, W.P No.104785/2016, W.P No.103380/2016, W.P No.101172/2016, W.P No.106558/2015, W.P Nos.100431-100435/2016, W.P Nos.103479-103481/2016, W.P Nos.103483-103484/2016, W.P No.103485/2016 & W.P No.103482/2016

68 1.31 The property bearing Sy.No.27/6B1 measuring 1 guntas 4.75 anas situated at Lakkammanahalli Dharwad belonging to the petitioner was acquired for the purpose of the BRTS project. However, payment of compensation was denied on the ground that the acquired land was earmarked as road margin area in the single layout plan approved by the Hubli-Dharwad Urban Development