Reported in : ILR2006KAR2234; [2006]284ITR245(KAR); [2006]284ITR245(Karn)
.....audited under section 142(2a) of the act. moreover, the question as to whether the accounts are complex in nature or not, is the pure question of fact to be determined by the ao only. the said preliminary conclusion regarding complexity of accounts is based on subjective satisfaction of the ao. in view of the same, in my considered opinion, the ao has applied his mind before passing the order under section 142(2a) of the act. he also found that the nature of accounts in question is complex in nature.8. now the only question that remains to be considered by this court is as to whether the proceedings were said to be pending before the ao at the time of passing an order under section 142(2a) of the act or not ?9. it is relevant to refer at this stage to the expln. 2 of section 132 of the act which reads thus :explanation 2 : in this section, the word 'proceeding means any proceeding in respect of any year, whether under the indian it act, 1922 (11 of 1922) or this act, which may be pending on the date on which a search is authorised under this section or which may have been completed on or before such date and includes also all proceedings under this act which may be commenced.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : (2006)202CTR(Kar)578; [2006]284ITR745(KAR); [2006]284ITR745(Karn); [2006]155TAXMAN295(Kar)
.....audited under section 142(2a) of the act.moreover, the question as to whether the accounts are complex in nature or not, is the pure question of fact to be determined by the assessing officer only. the said preliminary conclusion regarding complexity of accounts is based on subjective satisfaction of the assessing officer. in view of the same, in my considered opinion, the assessing officer has applied his mind before passing the order under section 142(2a) of the act. he also found that the nature of accounts in question is complex in nature.8. now the only question that remains to be considered by this court is as to whether the proceedings were said to be pending before the assessing officer at the time of passing an order under section 142(2a) of the act or not ?9. it is relevant to refer at this stage to the explanation 2 of section 132 of the act which reads thus :'explanation 2 : in this section, the word 'proceeding' means any proceeding in respect of any year, whether under the indian income tax act, 1922 (11 of 1922) or this act, which may be pending on the date on which a search is authorised under this section or which may have been completed on or before such.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : 2006(4)ALD157; 2006(3)ALT700
.....officer (mro), saroor nagar for passing appropriate orders. this common order is subject matter of c.r.p.nos. 2775 and 2776 of 2005.2. the brief fact of the matter is not much in dispute. the land admeasuring acs.32-02 guntas comprised in survey nos. 367 to 369 of nadargul village of saroor nagar mandal in ranga reddy district originally belonged to one shaik alladdin. the said landholder leased out land to one kata michael, who was enjoying it as protected tenant. after death of landholder, his two sons jamaluddin and imamuddin succeeded to the property, likewise after death of protected tenant kata michael, his son sowraiah, who is the father of the petitioners herein succeeded as a tenant. the two legal heirs of landholder sold the land to one smt. vidya mashalkar under registered sale deed, dated 02-12-1965. in turn, smt. vidya mashalkar sold the land on 30-03-1994 in favour of one chippa babaiah, who is the predecessor of the respondents.3. sowraiah applied to mro under sections 32 and 40 of the tenancy act seeking recognition as legal heir of the protected tenant and also for restoration of possession to him. the application was dismissed. on appeal, under section 90 of.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : III(2006)ACC724; 2007ACJ1315; 2006(4)ALD273; 2006(4)ALT650
.....is that the insurance policy taken by the 2nd respondent, to cover the liability under the motor vehicles act became inoperative, on account of the fact that the cheque issued by the 2nd respondent for payment of the premium was dishonoured. ex.b-1 is the attested copy of the policy, through rw-1, the senior assistant of the appellant. a letter dated 10-5-2002, addressed by the appellant to the 2nd respondent herein was marked as ex.b-2. a copy of the same was sent to the r.t.a., chennai, and it was marked as ex.b-3.6. in view of the judgments of the supreme court, referred to above, it is beyond any pale of controversy that, in case, the cheque, issued for payment of premium for a policy, is dishonoured, the insurer cannot be held liable. however, the question, as to whether the cheque was dishonoured at all, is a matter of fact, which must be proved to the satisfaction of the tribunal. the issuance of a cheque and dishonour thereof, are the matters between the insurer and the insured. the victim of an accident would hardly have any role in this regard. prima facie, ex.b-1 covers the liability, arising out of the accident. in case, the appellant wanted to avoid its liability,.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : 2006(4)ALD467
.....the property. he contends that the interests of the appellants are not at all safe in the hands of their maternal uncle and having regard to the facts of the case, the trial court had provided for most equitable arrangement.6. the first respondent filed the la. invoking section 94 and order 40 c.p.c. on the face of it, section 94 c.p.c does not apply to the facts of this case. so far as order 40 c.p.c. is concerned, time and again this court held that in the suits for partition, appointment of receivers can be resorted to, only in exceptional cases. the reason is that the joint family properties are supposed to be for the benefit and enjoyment of all the members thereof and till the partition, as such, takes place, the properties must be managed by the karta or the other person in management of the family. further, till a partition, as such, is brought about, the property is deemed to be in possession and enjoyment of all the coparceners and at the most, they can insist on the karata or the manager, to account for the benefits derived out of the properties. even otherwise, before the properties are kept at the disposal of a receiver, a definite finding must be recorded by the.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : 2006CriLJ3090
.....'the act') to launch prosecution under section 32 for the alleged offences said to have been committed under the act in connection with the manufacture and sale of ayurvedic drugs ozomen capsules and ozomen forte.2. as these petitions raise a point of some significance in relation to the proper construction and interaction of sections 33a, 33b, 33eec, 33g, 33m of the act. therefore, they are extracted hereunder:33-a chapter not to apply to ayurvedic, siddha or unani drugs : save as otherwise provided in this act, nothing contained in this chapter shall apply to 'ayurvedic (including siddha) or unani'.33-b application of chapter iv-a:this chapter shall apply only to ayurvedic, siddha and unani drugs.33-eec prohibition of manufacture and sale of certain ayurvedic, siddha and unani drugs:from such date as the state government may, by notification in the official gazette, specify in this behalf, no person, either by himself or by any other person on his behalf, shall -(a) manufacture for sale or for distribution -(i) any misbranded, adulterated or spurious ayurvedic, siddha or unani drug;(ii) any patent or proprietary medicine, unless there is displayed in the prescribed manner.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : 2006(6)ALT591
.....for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondent.4. the marriage between the petitioner and the respondent appears to have fallen in despair since its inception. practically, there was no matrimonial life between the parties. as of now, the respondent is said to be undergoing treatment for psychiatric disorders. if that be so, it is not known as to how he can find fault with the petitioner. be that as it may, the proceedings were to be instituted in a court within whose jurisdiction the respondent resides. the difficulty of a woman in travelling from hyderabad to visakhapatnam can easily be imagined. if the physical and mental condition of the respondent is such that it does not permit him to prosecute the proceedings, the same reason applies to the filing of the o.p. also.5. fortheforegoingreasons,the tr. c.m.p. is allowed and o.p. no. 11 of 2006 is transferred from the family court, visakhapatnam to the family court, hyderabad. after such transfer, the learned family court judge shall ensure that the presence of the respondent is required only on important occasions such as the presence for reconciliation and examination of a witness.
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : 2007(208)ELT18(AP); [2007]8STJ406(AP); 2008[11]STR88
order1. petition under section 151 of cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the high court will have pleased to stay all the further proceedings by the respondent pursuant to the remand order made by the cegat in 1342 to 1346 of 2004 dated 30-11-05 pending disposal of the c.e.a. no. 2/06 on the file of the high court.2. the petition coming on for hearing upon perusing the petition and the affidavit filed in support thereof and upon hearing the argument of sri a. mahadev, advocate for the petitioner and of sri a. rajashekar reddy, sc for central government for the respondents.3. since the question of maintainability of the appeal itself is questioned by the respondent, therefore at this stage no stay can be granted, c.e.a.m.p. is therefore dismissed.
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : [2006(110)FLR505]
.....employees pension scheme will also govern the case of retirement under the v.r.s. scheme as there are no separate rules for the same. the mere fact that the petitioner's services came to an end under the v.r.s. scheme, will ipso facto not imply that he can be proceeded against for any previous misfeasance committed by him during his tenure of service. the above scheme has provided for 4 years limitation and any misdemnour on the part of the part of the employee leading to loss can be departmentally examined if it is occurred during this period. the petitioner's contention that the final handshake under the vrs scheme obliterates all liabilities or past actions cannot consequently be accepted.6. it was further contended from the side of the petitioner that as will appear from the 'articles of charges' part of the counter affidavit and para-4 of the counter affidavit that no prima-facie case is ab initio made out against the petitioner, because the fault, if any, was committed by r.k. jaiswal who had an independent authority to issue cover note and was solely liable to indemnify to the company for any pecuniary loss caused to the company by his act as specifically provided in.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : 2006(3)AWC2808
.....the name of the college and city has not been advertised and every candidate was asked to give his choice at the time of interview for it. the facts here are, therefore, different and the ratio of the aforesaid judgment will not be applicable.9. the petitioner's contention that there has been violation of rules inasmuch as the vacancy against which he is working was not advertised in the name of college and city , is correct but it is to be noticed, that the petitioner was not called for interview as contemplated under section 13(1) above and did not consequently succeed in the examination. it does not, therefore, provide to him legitimate and sustainable cause of action, because he has not succeeded in the examination. things would have been different, had he appeared in the interview/examination and succeeded and assigned to some other college.10. the court must and does refuse to examine the illegalities in abstract. even if any illegality has been committed, it will have no consequence so for the petitioner is concerned because he did not succeed in examination. it is, therefore, the last ditch effort by candidate, to obtain through the court, what he could not achieve.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT