Karnataka High Court

Despite invocation of Section 138 of NI Act Crime can be registered under Sections 406, 420 of IPC

Rashmi Tandon Vs State of Karnataka (Karnataka High Court)

Submission of petitioners that proceeding for offence punishable under Section 420 of IPC is not maintainable once the complainant invokes Section 138 of NI Act is unacceptable....

Read More

Labour Court cannot Adjudicate Workman’s Claim U/s. 33C(2) of Industrial Dispute Act in an Undetermined Claim

Management of KSRTC Vs Sri K. Shivaram (Karnataka High Court)

Management of KSRTC Vs Sri K. Shivaram (Karnataka High Court) Section 33C(2) of the I.D. Act refers to any amount due to workman. Section 33C(1) of the Industrial Dispute Act (I.D. Act) speaks of any amount due to workman under the settlement or award under the provision of Chapter 5-A or 5-B of the I.D. […]...

Read More

Advertisement Tax levied by Municipal Corporation not Conflicts with GST

Hubballi Dharwad Advertisers Association (R) Vs State of Karnataka (Karnataka High Court)

It is declared that there is no conflict between the power to levy GST under GST Act and power of Municipal Corporation to levy advertisement fee or advertisement tax under Section 134 of the Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act....

Read More

GST: Compliance of necessary ingredients/conditions of Section 83 is sine qua non

Union of India Vs Anandbhavan Properties (Karnataka High Court)

Union of India Vs Anandbhavan Properties (Karnataka High Court) It is trite that when the Act specifically provides the requirements for invoking Section 83, it has to be strictly adhered to. Merely referring to the letter which indeed does not refer to section 74, it cannot be presumed that such proceedings under Section 74 of […]...

Read More

Case Summary Sri Babu A Dhammanagi vs Union of India

Babu A. Dhammanagi Vs Union of India (High Court of Karnataka)

Resolution Professional's job is confined to making recommendations; there is no aspect of adjudication on the Resolution Professional's behalf. The final decision on whether the application should be accepted or rejected is made by the Adjudicating Authority, which is not bound by the Resolution Professional's advice....

Read More

Arbitration, in absence of third party, leads the proceeding non-arbitrable

South India Biblical Seminary Vs Indraprastha Shelters Pvt. Ltd. (Karnataka High Court)

The petitioner, while thus admitting creation of third party rights, proposes adjudication of its right to recover possession of the subject apartments in the absence of these third parties....

Read More

HC upheld removal of CA member for other misconduct

Institute of Chartered Accountant of India Vs Shri. P.P. jay (Karnataka High Court)

Institute of Chartered Accountant of India Vs Shri. P.P. jay (Karnataka High Court) ICAI submitted that the report of the Institute be accepted as the respondent has been found to be guilty of grave misconduct and the penalty has been imposed on the respondent commensurate to the misconduct, which has been proved. None has appeared [&hell...

Read More

Owner can seek redemption of confiscated goods/conveyances even after confiscation order

Shel Singh Purohit Vs Commercial Taxes Officer (Karnataka High Court)

Shel Singh Purohit Vs Commercial Taxes Officer (Karnataka High Court) The text of provision of Sec. 129 of the Act provides for detention of the goods along with the transport vehicle and Sec.130 provides for the confiscation of the same on certain grounds, as contended by learned AGA is true; however, sub-section (2) of Sec. […]...

Read More

Section 292BB cannot cure Failure to Issue Section 143(2) Notice within limitation period

PCIT Vs Cherian Abraham (Karnataka High Court)

PCIT Vs Cherian Abraham (Karnataka High Court) The undisputed facts are that the search was conducted in the case of a search person on 06.02.2012. Pursuant to which Section 153C proceedings were initiated against the assessee. Notice under Section 142[1] was issued on 12.09.2013 calling the assessee to file the return. Reply was filed on...

Read More

Proviso (v) To Section 14(1) SARFAESI Act is Valid Constitutionally

Kumaresh K Vs Union Of India and Other (Karnataka High Court)

Kumaresh K Vs Union Of India and Other (Karnataka High Court) It is evident that Section 14(1)(v) of Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act) provides that an application which may be submitted by the secured creditor shall be accompanied by an affidavit duly affir...

Read More

Browse All Categories

CA, CS, CMA (6,019)
Company Law (8,230)
Custom Duty (9,154)
DGFT (4,767)
Excise Duty (4,688)
Fema / RBI (5,129)
Finance (5,542)
Income Tax (40,768)
SEBI (4,425)
Service Tax (3,935)

Search Posts by Date

May 2022
M T W T F S S
 1
2345678
9101112131415
16171819202122
23242526272829
3031