Kolkata Court March 1963 Judgments
Dilip Kumar Mukherjee Vs. Commercial Tax Officer and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-28-1963
Reported in: AIR1965Cal498
ORDERD. Basu, J. 1. This is an application under Article 226 for appropriate writs to quash the assessment order of Respondent 1, dated 10-5-59 (Ann. A), assessing sales tax upon the petitioner for the period from 1-4-57 to 31-3-58, rejecting the Petitioner's claim for exemption, as well as the order of the Appellate Authority (Respondent 2), dated 27-1-61 (Ann. C), and also for an order for refund and ancillary reliefs. 2. The Petitioner challenges the order of assessment on various grounds, namely, I. That the assessment for the entire period is vitiated by a violation of the principles of natural justice inasmuch as Respondent 1 made the assessment under Section 11(1) of the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941 (hereinafter referred to in this judgment as the 'Bengal Act'), arbitrarily and without disclosing any materials upon which such 'best of judgment' assessment was made. II. That the Petitioner is entitled to exemption from sales tax under the Bengal Act with respect to the p...
Tag this Judgment!Bengal Box Manufacturing Company Vs. Second Industrial Tribunal and or ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-28-1963
Reported in: (1963)IILLJ475Cal
B.N. Banerjee, J.1. The petitioner-firm, Bengal Box Manufacturing Company, moved this Court with the grievance that an award of an industrial tribunal was made against the firm without service of notice on the firm and obtained this rule.2. It appears that the petitioner-firm has its principal place of business at No. 6, Rajkumar Chatterjee Road, in the town of Calcutta. This is evident from the certificate of registration of the petitioner-firm, issued by the Registrar of Firms, West Bengal. It is also admitted that the petitioner-firm has its factory at No. 4, Rajkumar Chatterjee Road, which is altogether a different premises. Respondents 5, 6, 7 and 8 were at one time employees under the petitioner-firm. They raised a dispute on the ground of alleged unlawful termination of their services. That dispute was taken up by respondent 9, the Press Employees' Association, and was converted into an industrial dispute. The State Government appears to have referred that dispute to the second ...
Tag this Judgment!Benukar Mahata Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-27-1963
Reported in: AIR1963Cal563
Bose, C.J. 1. This is an appeal from an order of J. P. Hitter, J. dated the 22nd of April 1959 discharging a Rule issued under Article 226 of the Constitution. 2. The facts giving rise to this appeal are shortly as follows: On 5th April, 1948 the appellant was employed as a Junior Accountant under the Assistant Regional Controller of Procurement at a monthly pay of Rs. 60/-. On 5th July, 1949 he was promoted to the rank of an Accountant and according to the appellant the scale of pay of the appellant was on the time scale basis of Rs. 80/- per month in the scale of Rs. 80-85-5/2-120. The details of the time scale of pay are given in paragraph 4 of the petition and the appellant alleges that he got his pay on the said scale up to 31st January, 1954; but he was informed by the Assistant Director of Procurement and supply (Personnel), Food and Supply Department, by a memorandum dated 30-1-54 that the appellant would get a fixed nay of Rs. 80/- instead of his salary of Rs. 120/-. The memor...
Tag this Judgment!Anil Kumar Kundu Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, West Bengal.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-24-1963
Reported in: [1965]55ITR366(Cal)
SEN J. - In this reference under section 66(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1922, the following question has been raised for decision by this court :'On the facts admitted or found, was the Income-tax Officer entitled to reopen the assessment of the assessee under section 34(1) (a) of the Income-tax Act ?'The assessee, Anil Kumar Kundu of Midnapore, is one of the partners of the firm of Hrishikesh Madan Mohan Kundu, a firm registered under section 26A of the Income-tax Act, 1922. Few days after the commencement of the accounting year, each of the partners contributed some capital to the said firm. According to his share the assessee, Anil Kumar Kundu, contributed a sum of Rs. 3,500 towards capital of the firm.In the assessment proceeding against the firm, it was called upon by the Income-tax Officer to explain the source and genuineness of this cash credit. The explanation was disbelieved by the department and the total sum of Rs. 32,000 contributed by the partners was included in the assess...
Tag this Judgment!Standard Refinery and Distillery Ltd Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax (C ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-23-1963
Reported in: [1965]55ITR139(Cal)
SANKAR PRASAD MITRA J. - This is a reference under section 66(2) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922. The assessee is public limited company. The assessment year is 1949-50, the corresponding accounting year being the calendar year ending on December 31,1948. The assessee-company was incorporated in 1942. It was then owning and working a distillery in Uttar Pradesh. It acquired a refinery in 1943. With effect from June 1, 1945, it obtained on lease the sugar factory belonging to the New Savan Sugar and Gur Refining Co. Ltd. and started manufacturing sugar. During the period between January 29, 1946, and April 23,1946, the assessee purchased 41,300 shares of the New Savan Sugar and Gur Refining Company Ltd. for Rs. 12,17096. On April 30, 1947, the entire block of 41,300 shares were sold to the Produce Exchange Corporation Ltd. for Rs. 8,46,750 resulting in a loss, which was determined to be Rs. 3,70,356. This loss was accepted by the Appellate Tribunal as a trading loss. It fell to be co...
Tag this Judgment!Juggilal Kamlapat Vs. Sew Chand Bagri and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-21-1963
Reported in: AIR1963Cal505
Sinha, J. 1. This is an appeal against an order of Mitter, J., dated the 3oth July, 1959. The facts are shortly as follows :2. One Sew Chand Bagri had three sons, Moti Chand, Manik Chand and Jankidas. During his life time, the said Sew Chand Bagree and his sons constituted a Hindu joint family and carried on business as such, under the name and style of Sew Chand Bagree. In 1932, Sew Chand Bagree died. The three brothers constituted a partnership and continued the business. In 1934 the partnership was registered. We have before us a certificate granted by the Registrar of firms which shows that on the 18th April, 1934 the firm of Sew Chand Bagree was carrying on business in partnership at 32 Cross Street, Calcutta, of which the partners were Manik Chand Bagree, Moti Chand Bagree and Jankidas Bagree. This partnership is said to have been dissolved after Dewali 1945. On or about the 7th June, 1946, a deed of dissolution was drawn up in the form of an agreement, a ropy whereof is set out ...
Tag this Judgment!Benoy Kumar Moulik Vs. Presidency Postmaster and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-21-1963
Reported in: (1963)IILLJ477Cal
B.N. Banerjee, J.1. The petitioner, Benoy Kamar Moulik, was at first appointed as a temporary clerk in the General Post Office, Calcutta, and was later on made permanent. On 4 May 1959, respondent 2, Deputy Presidency Postmaster, Calcutta, suspended the petitioner, on the ground that a criminal offence, alleged to have been committed by the petitioner, was under Investigation, The order of suspension is herein below set out:Whereas a case against Benoy Kumar Moulik, clerk, Treasury Department, Calcutta General Post Office, in respect of a criminal offence is under investigation;Now, therefore, the undersigned, in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub-rule (1) of Rule 12 of the Central Civil (?) Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1967, hereby places the said Benoy Kumar Moulik under suspension with effect from the afternoon of 4 May 1959.2. It appears from the order sheet of the Chief Presidency Magistrate, annexed to the petition, that the criminal case against the ...
Tag this Judgment!Ukhra Forest and Fisheries (P) Ltd. Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-19-1963
Reported in: AIR1964Cal223
Bachawat, J. 1. This Rule is directed against an order of the specialLand Acquisition Judge, Asonsol, dated the 12th September, 1960, in L.A. Case No. 159 of 1960 by which he heldthat he had no jurisdiction to hear the case because there was no award and no reference in respect of Schedule B lands in the case.2. The point in issue is whether there is a valid award and a valid reference by the Collector in respect or Schedule B lands (jungle lands). The award of the collectorwas that as the jungle lands vested in the State under the amended Estates Acquisition Act and as the petitioner owner had no subsisting interest in the same after the date of vesting, no compensation should be assessed for those lands and accordingly he awarded nil compensation to the petitioner. The petitioner was dissatisfied with the award and by a written application to the collector required that the matter be referred by the collector tothe Court under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The petitio...
Tag this Judgment!Shib Prosad Ghosh Vs. District Judge (Authority Under the Minimum Wage ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-19-1963
Reported in: (1963)IILLJ184Cal
B.N. Banerjee, J.1. There is a union of bus-owners, in the district 24-Parganae, known an the Gholsapur Bus Syndicate (hereinafter referred to as the syndicate). The petitioner, Shib Prosad Ghosh, was, at all times material to this rule, the secretary of the syndicate and ex officio member of the executive committee of the Syndicate.2. By an award of an industrial tribunal, dated 20 March 1966, the scale of pay for starters and timekeepers employed by the syndicate was fixed at Re. 87 per month, inclusive of allowances. Thereafter, on 4 July 1959, the respondent State Government reviewed the minimum wages payable to starters and timekeepers, employed by public transport concerns in the district of 24-Parganas, in exercise of its powers under Section 3 of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948, and fixed the same at Rs. 100. This order was published in the Calcutta Gazette on 6 August 1959.3. Notwithstanding the above fixation of minimum wages, there was an agreement between the syndicate and thei...
Tag this Judgment!F. S. Securities Ltd. Vs. Inland Revenue Commissioners.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-18-1963
Reported in: [1965]58ITR756(Cal)
SELLERS L.J. - I have had the advantage of considering the judgment which Donovan L.J. has prepared and is about to deliver, in which he has set out the facts and referred to the authorities relied on in the respective arguments. I agree with his judgment and the conclusion that the appeal should be dismissed. I would only add this briefly.F. S. Securities Ltd., in so far as they trade at all, and it must be accepted that they did, traded in stocks and shares and the three securities in questions which they held were the main part of their stock-in-trade (Griffiths v. J. P. Harrison (Watford) Ltd. The company claimed to have made a loss and were regarded by the Inland Revenue so to have done and were paid over 400,000 Pounds as are payment of tax on that basis, but as their trade brought in earning of over 1,600,000 Pounds gross dividends received, the company in fact made a fabulous profit on 100 Pounds subscribed capital. If the facts are to be accepted as establishing a 'trading' or...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »