Kolkata Court January 1937 Judgments
In Re: Mohanpur Tea Co. Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-28-1937
Reported in: AIR1938Cal148
Panckridge, J.1. The assessees are a company incorporated under the Indian Companies Act with their registered office in Calcutta. Their income, profits and gains, are derived from the sale of tea grown and manufactured on a tea estate in the Indian State of Tipperah, and then sent to Calcutta and sold there. For the year 1935-36 the Income-tax Officer assessed the company on a taxable income of Rs. 1029 on which an income-tax of Rs. 162-10.0 has been demanded. The assessees claim that 60 per cent. of their assessed income is not liable to tax. The assessees rely on the principle laid down in Killing Valley Tea do. Ltd. v. Secy. of State (1921) 8 AIR Cal 40, where it was held that when tea is grown and manufactured in British India a portion of the income, profits and gains, derived from its sale in British India must be regarded as 'agricultural income' and therefore outside the scope of the Income-tax Act by reason of Section 4 (3) (viii), Income-tax Act. This principle has subsequen...
Tag this Judgment!Sarada Prosad Ghose and ors. Vs. Prafulla Chandra Ghosh and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-28-1937
Reported in: AIR1938Cal188
S.K. Ghose, J. 1. This is an appeal by the defendants in a suit for rent, the question raised being as to the amount of rent payable. Plaintiffs are owners of a temporarily settled estate T. 919 of the Khulna Collectorate which comprises 4 mouzas, the defendants' tenure being with-in one of them. The original revenue from the entire estate was Rs. 2250 upon a settlement of 99 years. In 1932 there was a re-settlement for 30 years and the revenue fixed was Rs. 11,205. The defendants' tenure was created on 31st March 1877 and the annual rental then payable was Rs. 687-4.0 for an area of 800 bighas. In 1930 there was assessment of additional' rent for additional area and the entire annual rent then fixed was Rs. 728-2as-14g. In 1932 when there was the re-settlement, the annual rent was increased to Rs. 2822 under Ch. 10, Part 2, Ben. Ten. Act, this rent being recorded as payable from 1st April 1932. Plaintiffs have sued on the basis of the Record of Rights at the above rate for the period ...
Tag this Judgment!Mohanpura Tea Company, Limited, Vs. Re.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-28-1937
Reported in: [1937]5ITR118(Cal)
PANCKRIDGE, J. - The assesse are a company incorporated under the Indian Companies Act with their registered office in Calcutta. Their income, profits, and gains, are derived from the sale of tea grown and manufactured on a tea estate in the Indian State of Tipperah, and then sent to Calcutta and sold there. For the year 1935-36 the Income-tax Officer assessed the company on the taxable income of Rs 1,029 on which an income-tax of 162-10 has been demanded. The assessees claim that 60 per cent. of their assessed income is not liable to tax.The assessees rely on the principle laid dowm in the Killing Valley Tea Company Ltd. v. Secretary of State for Indian (I.L.R. 48 Cal. 161) where it was held that when tea is grown and manufactured in British India a portion of the income, profits and gains derived from its sale in British India must be regarded as 'agricultural income' and therefore, outside the scope of the Indian must be regarded as 'agricultural income' and therefore, outside the s...
Tag this Judgment!In the Matter of the Official Assignee for Bengal. (Estate of Jnanendr ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-28-1937
Reported in: [1937]5ITR233(Cal)
COSTELLO, J. - This matter comes before us on a Reference under Sec. 66(1) of the Indian Income-Tax Act, 1992, in respect of an assessment for the year of account ending March 31, 1934.The question propounded by the Commissioner of Income Tax, for our consideration is stated in paragraph 3 of his statement of the case and is in this form. 'Whether, when on the making of an order of adjudication under the presidency of Towns Insolvency Fact (Act III of 1909) the property of the insolvent becomes vested in the Official Assignee and such Official Assignee takes possession thereof, the tax in respect of the income, profits and gains of such property chargeable under the Income-Tax Act (Act XI of 1922) and received by the Official Assignee should or should not be leviable and recoverable from such Official Assignee'.The facts briefly stated were these :One Jnanendra Nath Pramanik was adjudged an insolvent by an order of this High Court on the May 16, 1933. Thereupon all his estate and effec...
Tag this Judgment!Madan Tilakdas and ors. Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-27-1937
Reported in: AIR1937Cal266
Cunliffe, J.1. The appellants here are five in number. They were tried by the Assistant Sessions Judge at Mymensingh for what may be called 'gang rape' and other semi cognate offences. As sometimes happens in these cases, the learned Judge did not rule out certain charges against the appellants which, I think, were highly redundant, for example, the charge of house-trespass by night-quite an unnecessary charge and one possibly calculated not to clarify the case when the jury came to consider the whole of the evidence finally. The verdict of the jury, it may be noted, was not a unanimous one; it was a 3 to 2 verdict, and the appellants were sentenced to in all five years' rigorous imprisonment apiece. But owing to the fact that the learned Judge let in these redundant charges, he was placed in the position of having to impose con. current sentences which, to my mind, was mere waste of time. Now, the prosecution case was broadly as follows: They said that a certain woman by name Mon Mohi...
Tag this Judgment!Jatindra Mohan Das Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-26-1937
Reported in: AIR1937Cal250
Henderson, J.1. The appellant has been convicted of an offence punishable under Section 373, I.P.C., by the unanimous verdict of a jury. Charges were also framed against him under Sections 366 and 498, I.P.C., but he was found not guilty. Two points have been taken on his behalf before us: (1) that the learned Judge should have directed the jury to return a verdict of not guilty on this charge; (2) that there is no evidence that the appellant obtained possession of the girl within the meaning of the section. I may note that the foreman of the jury indicated that in their opinion the girl in question was above sixteen but below eighteen years of rage. In order to understand the arguments addressed to us certain facts alleged by the prosecution require to be stated. The appellant is a clerk in the Income-tax Department and was attached to the office in Khulna. The girl Parulbala is the wife of one Bidhu Bhusan Das, son of Manindra Das, who were both peons attached to the office. The appe...
Tag this Judgment!Kumar Chandra Singh Dudhoria and anr. Vs. Gobinda Das Nath and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-26-1937
Reported in: AIR1937Cal280
Jack, J.1. These appeals have arisen out of two petitions of objection to the execution of a decree against (1) the petitioner Gobinda Das Nath (2), the petitioner Shyama Charan Nath, and Radhaballav Nath. The decree is a simple money decree against Nityakali Dasya on her admission in a hatchhita (Ex. F) dated 2nd Baisack 1328 B.S. that up to that date she owed the moneylending firm of Raja Bijoy Singh Dudhoria Rs. 13,874-12-0. The claim in the suit in 1924 was for Rs. 18,945-13-0 including interest and costs. In an execution case of 1925 Rs. 17,550 was realized. In an execution case of 1929, Rs. 3,950 was realized.2. The claim in the present execution case up to 1st January 1934 was Rs. 5,296 including interest and costs. Execution was taken out against the objectors not as legal representatives of Nityakali who died in 1932 but as owners of the property left by Rakhaldas Boral (the late husband of Nityakali). The objections are on the grounds: (1) that the decree is a personal decree...
Tag this Judgment!Mt. Mahmooda Bibi and anr. Vs. Mt. Nainoo Bibi and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-26-1937
Reported in: AIR1937Cal384
ORDERAmeer Ali, J.1. In this matter I had come to a conclusion at the end of the hearing; I reserved judgment because I desired to reconsider the whole matter. It is clear that the parties attach great importance to the result. The matter was argued at length before me and from the fact that large number of counsel were briefed including the Advocate-General the parties must have gone to very great expense. I regret I am unable to assist them. The point is shortly this. A Commissioner in a partition suit has entered into an agreement to sell. The purchaser is represented before me. The application is in terms for an injunction restraining the Commissioner and the purchaser Messrs. Magniram Bungur from proceeding with the sale. I omit the verbiage. Secondly, that the Commissioner of Partition be directed to accept the highest offer of Khan Bahadur Syed Mahomed Jan. That was an offer, as I shall indicate, made subsequent to the agreement for sale, though in form asking for an injunction ...
Tag this Judgment!Hemanga Bhusan Roy Choudhury Vs. Bhim Gharami and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-26-1937
Reported in: AIR1937Cal761
M.C. Ghose, J.1. This is an appeal by the plaintiff in an application for determination of the amount of mesne profits. The plaintiff sued for recovery of possession of certain lands and for mesne profits up to the date of the institution of the suit. The land was valued at Rs. 601 and the amount of mesne profits up to the date of the suit was stated to be about Rs. 499. The suit was valued at Rs. 1,000 and instituted in the Court of the Munsif. The Munsif found the title in favour of the plaintiff and decreed that the defendant do make over possession of the lands to the plaintiffs. The plaintiff then applied for determination of the mesne profits. The Court appointed a Commissioner to determine the mesne profits. The Commissioner found that the plaintiff was entitled to mesne profits at Rs. 915 per annum. This sum was allowed for the period of one year after the institution of the suit, but for the two years before the institution of the suit the Court did not allow the sum of Rs. 1,...
Tag this Judgment!Pramatha Nath Bhattacharjee Vs. Sashi Bhusan Banerjee and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-26-1937
Reported in: AIR1937Cal763
1. This is an appeal by defendant 1 arising out of a suit for khas possession of about 15 bighas of land lying in Mouza Damra in the District of Bankura. The late Tara Prosanna Basu, the father of defendant 5 in the suit, held this mouza along with several other mouzas in patni right. He mortgaged by conditional sale the entire patni to Bapin Behari Banerjee and Jagannath Marwari on 2nd May 1912. Defendant 5 was adjudicated an insolvent on 21st February 1914. Bepin and Jagannath instituted a suit for foreclosure on the basis of the mortgage in their favour by Taraprosanna in the year 1915. During the pendency of this suit Taraprosanna died leaving defendant 5 as his only legal representative. The latter was substituted in place of the original mortgagor, but the receiver of the estate of defendant 5, appointed in the insolvency proceeding, was not made a party it the mortgage suit. On 19th September 1919 the mortgagees took possession of the mortgage properties on the basis of the fina...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »