Kolkata Court January 1946 Judgments
J.A. Shellim Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-22-1946
Reported in: AIR1947Cal338
Gentle, J.1. This is an application by the assessee under Section 66(2), Income-tax Act, for an order requiring the Income-tax Tribunal to state a case and formulate questions for the opinion of this Court. It arises in the following circumstances. The year of account in question is 1940-1941. The assessee made a return to the Income-tax office in which he included, as income under other sources (Section 12) 'speculation Rs. 865-8-0.' On being asked to justify that amount he was totally unable to do so although in the return the income is set out to an exact anna. The Income-tax Officer, on an examination, found that he had two books, the Eastern Bank and the other Lloyd's Bank. In the Eastern Bank there were two accounts and one at the latter Bank. In one of the Eastern Bank accounts and the Lloyd's Bank account there were considerable credits for a period of one year, the total of the two amounted to Rs. 79,972. There also were debits. The assessee was asked the source of the credits...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Waliur Rahman
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-22-1946
Reported in: AIR1947Cal340
Gentle, J.1. This is an application by the Commissioner of Income-tax, Bengal, for an order calling upon the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal to state a case on questions of law with respect to its order relating to an assessment for the year 1938-1939 made upon Khan Bahadur Waliur Rahman of Jalpaiguri. On 17-1-1944 this Court issued a rule nisi calling upon the Tribunal to show cause why a case should not be stated and this is the hearing of the rule which was served not only on the Tribunal but also on the assessee. Since the issue of this application the assessee had died and his sons and daughters have been brought on the record as his legal representatives. No point arises out of this.2. It is convenient first to state the relevant facts. The assessee and his wife Begum Manija Khatun, are each possessed of separate properties, the wife's property was in no way derived from her husband and she obtained it from other sources. Each of them is the proprietor of lands, portions of which a...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax, Bengal Vs. Khan Bahadur Waliur Rahman.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-22-1946
Reported in: [1946]14ITR287(Cal)
GENTLE J. - This is an application by the Commissioner of Income-tax, Bengal, for an order calling upon the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal to state a case on questions of law with respect to its order relating to an assessment for the year 1938-39 made upon Khan Bahadur Waliur Rahman of Jalpaiguri. On the 17th January, 1944, this court issued a rule nisi calling upon the Tribunal to show cause why a case should not be stated and this is the hearing of the rule which was served not only on the Tribunal but also on the assessee. Since the issue of this application the assessee had died and his sons and daughters have been brought on the record as his legal representatives. No point arises out of this.It is convenient first to state the relevant facts. The assessee and his wife, Begum Manija Khatun, are each possessed of separate properties, the wifes property was in no way derived from her husband and she obtained if from other sources. Each of them is the proprietor of lands, portions of...
Tag this Judgment!J. A. Shellim Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Bengal.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-22-1946
Reported in: [1946]14ITR318(Cal)
GENTLE, J. - This is an application by the assessee under Section 66(2) of the Income-tax Act for an order requiring the Income-tax Tribunal to state a case and formulate questions for the opinion of this Court. It arises in the following circumstances. The year of account in question is 1940-41. The assessee made a return to the Income-tax Officer in which he included, as income under other sources (Section 12), 'speculation Rs. 365-8.0.' On being asked to justify that amount, he was totally unable to do so although in the return, the income is set out to an exact anna. The Income-tax Officer, or an examination, found that he had two banks, the Eastern Bank and the other, Lloyds Bank. In the Eastern Bank there were two accounts and one at the latter bank. In one of the Eastern Bank accounts and the Lloyds Bank account there were considerable credits for a period of one year; the total of the two amounted to Rs. 79,792. There also were debits. The assessee was asked the source of the c...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Gostha Behari Sadhukhan and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-17-1946
Reported in: AIR1947Cal145
Gentle, J.1. This is a Reference by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal at ,the instance of the Commissioner of Income-tax, Calcutta. The facts concerned can shortly be stated as follows : For many years a business known as Gopal Pure Oil Mills was owned by a Hindu undivided family the members of which were Gostha Behari Sadbukhan and his three nephews, Sarat Chandra Sadhukhan, Rabindra Nath Sadhukhan aud Panchkari Sadhukhan. Up to and including the year of assessment, 1941-1942, this business was assessed as a Hindu undivided family. On 29-10-1912 an application was made to the Income-tax Officer under Section 26A(1), Income-tax Act, to register a deed of partnership. The Income-tax Officer refused to register it. The deed of partnership is dated 15-6-1942, made between Gostha Behari of the first part, Sarat purporting and stating as representative of himself and his brothers Rabindra and Panchkari of the second part and three other persona Amulya Charan Samanta, Jugal Krishna Das and K...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Bengal Vs. Gostha Behari Sadhukhan and Othe ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-17-1946
Reported in: [1946]14ITR219(Cal)
GENTLE, J. - This is a reference by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal at the instance of the Commissioner of Income-tax, Calcutta. The facts concerned can shortly be stated as follows :- For many years a business known as Gopal Pure Oil Mills was owned by a Hindu undivided family the members of which were Gostha Behari Sadhukhan and his three nephews, Sarat Chandra Sadhukhan, Rabindra Nath Sadhukhan and Panchkari Sadhukhan. Up to and including the year of assessment 1941-42, this business was assessed as a Hindu undivided family. On the 29th October, 1942, an application was made to the Income-tax Officer under Section 26-A(1) of the Income-tax Act to register a deed of partnership. The Income-tax Officer refused to register it. The deed of partnerships is dated 15th June, 1942, made between Gostha Behari of the first part, Sarat purporting and stating as representative of himself and his brothers Rabindra and Panchkari of the second part, and three other persons, Amulya Charan Samanta...
Tag this Judgment!In Re: Sm. Charusila Dassi as Trustee to the Sm. Charusila Trust Estat ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-16-1946
Reported in: AIR1947Cal148
Gentle, J.1. This reference by the Commissioner of Income-tax of Calcutta arises out of a deed of settlement dated 11-3-1938 executed by Sm. Charusila Dassi (hereinafter called 'the Settlor') in favour of herself, her deceased husband's adopted son, Debi Prosanna Ghose, and three other gentlemen, who were not members of her or her husband's family (they are hereinafter called 'the trustees'). By the deed the settlor created a trust, called the Sm. Charusila Trust Estate, of lands and other immovable properties in Deoghar, Bihar, and in Calcutta (stated to be worth Rs. 10 lacs) which she conveyed unto-the trustees to receive the income therefrom, subject to the trusts therein mentioned. The lands and properties comprised: (a) a piece of land at Karanibagh in Deoghar upon which to build a temple, (b) A house and land known as 'Charunibas' in Deoghar in which the settlor resided, (c) Five immovable properties in Calcutta.2. The trusts mentioned in the deed were : 1. To permit the settlor ...
Tag this Judgment!Sm. Charusila Dassi and Others, in Re.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-16-1946
Reported in: [1946]14ITR362(Cal)
GENTLE, J. - This reference by the Commissioner of Income-tax of Calcutta arises out of a deed settlement dated 11th March 1938, executed by Sreemati Charusila Dassi (hereinafter called ' the settlor') in favour of herself, her deceased husbands adopted son, Debi Prosanna Ghose, and three other gentlemen, who were not members of her or her husbands family (they are hereinafter called 'the trustees'). By the deed the settlor created immovable properties in Deoghar, Bihar, and in Calcutta (stated to be worth Rs. 10 lacs) which she conveyed unto the trustees to receive the income therefrom, subject to the trusts therein mentioned. The lands and properties comprised :-(a) a piece of land at Karanibad in Deoghar upon which to build a temple, (b) a house and land known as 'Charunibas' in Deoghar in which the settlor resided,(c) five immovable properties in Calcutta.The trusts mentioned in the deed were :-1. To permit the settlor to use and occupy 'Charunibas' free of rent during to her lifet...
Tag this Judgment!Corporation of Calcutta Vs. Sasi Bhusan Mukherjee
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-14-1946
Reported in: AIR1947Cal273
Blank, J.1. This is an appeal by the plaintiff, Corporation of Calcutta, from concurrent decisions of a Munsif of Alipore and of a Subordinate Judge of the same place. The facts from which the present appeal arises are briefly the following. They are mostly admitted. Premises No. 88, Garden Reach Road were purchased by one Nitya Hari Mukherjee in auction in a title execution case. Nitya Hari Babu wrote to the Corporation of Calcutta, it is said about 11-1-1935, asking to be informed how much was due on account of the arrears of the municipal consolidated rates. The Corporation replied on 17-1-1935 (Ex. A) to the effect that Rs. 434-10-0 in all remained outstanding, and gave details of arrears from the third quarter of the financial year 1931-32 (that is, October to December 1931) continuously to the fourth quarter of the financial year 1933-34, also stating that bills from the first to the fourth quarters of the year 1934-35 were in the hands of the Collector, evidently for what may be...
Tag this Judgment!Tarak Nath Bagchi Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-04-1946
Reported in: AIR1947Cal347
Gentle, J.1. The applicant is the Receiver appointed by this Court in respect of the assets of a business which was conducted in the name of Messrs. P.M. Bagchi & Co. There are several branches of this business at various places in Calcutta including one at No. 19 and 19/1, Gulu Ostagar Lane, and another at No. 14, Olive Street, Calcutta; the former is within the area of the Income-tax Officer of District No. 1(2) and the latter within the area of the Income-tax Officer of District No. 5. It is said that the principal place of business was at Gulu Ostagar Lane, Calcutta. Proceedings having been taken with respect to this business of which, at one time, a man named Panchanan Bagchi was the sole proprietor and the applicant, having been appointed Receiver he entered upon his duties and took possession of the assets on 18-7-1935.2. In this matter before us, the Commissioner of Income-tax, Calcutta, is showing cause against a rule nisi granted by this Court on 12-1-1944, requiring the Inco...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »