Kolkata Court September 1963 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Kamal Singh Rampuria Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-12-1963
Reported in: [1970]75ITR162(Cal)
Sen, J.1. This is a reference under Section 66(1) of the Income-tax Act,1922, hereinafter referred to as ' the Act '. The facts as appearing in thethe case are as follows:The assessee, Kamal Singh Rampuria, was born in December, 1935. His mother died within a week after his birth. Before her death she had executed a will, by which she disposed of Rs. 5,00,000 received by her as a gift previously from her husband, Hulash Chand Rampuria.. She bequeathed by this will Rs. 1,00,000 to her daughter, Rs. 1,00,000 made up of various sums to charity, and the balance of Rs. 3,00,000 was bequeathed to her son the assessee. This sum of Rs. 3,00,000 was invested in the firm of Messrs. Hazari-mal Hiralal and earned interest. Besides, the deceased owned one-sixth share in the firm of Messrs. Bikanir Trading Co., and this also came to the assessee. In the several returns made during his minority by his father, the said Hulash Chand Rampuria, since deceased, showed the income from the firm till 1944-45...
Madanlal Mahawar and ors. Vs. the Commercial Tax Officer, Central Sect ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-10-1963
Reported in: [1965]16STC1071(Cal)
Banerjee, J.1. At all periods material for the purpose of this Rule, the petitioners, who are three in number, and one Saraswati Mahawar used to carry on business in co-partnership under the firm name Madanlal Gajanand, as exporters, importers and order suppliers, at No. 28, Armenian Street, in the town of Calcutta. Saraswati Mahawar is now dead and the three petitioners are now the only partners of the firm above-named.2. On 7th August, 1958, the firm obtained a certificate of registration as a dealer, under the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941, from the Commercial Tax Officer, Amratolla Charge (respondent No. 3). Under the registration certificate, the petitioner was required to submit quarterly returns in every samvat year, which was the accounting year of the firm. Respectively on 9th February, 1960, and 24th May, 1960, the petitioners, in their firm name, allege to have submitted their quarterly returns for the quarters ending Magh Bodi 14, 2016 S.Y. (corresponding to 27th Jan...
Sugan Chand Suraogi Vs. the Commissioner of Income-tax, Calcutta and a ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-04-1963
Reported in: AIR1964Cal399,68CWN84,[1964]53ITR717(Cal)
A.C. Sen, J.1. The present appeal is directed against an order -dated 10th of February, 1961 passed by Hon'ble Mr. Justice D. N. Sinha on an application by the appellant under Article 228 of the Constitution asking for a Rule on the respondent to show cause why a writ in the nature of certiorari should not be issued, commanding the said respondent to certify and return to it is Court the records relating to the order complained of. Sinha, J. by the sail order dated 10th of February, 1961 discharged the Rule issued by Mitter, J. on the said application under Article 229 on the 24th of March, 1960.2. The facts of the case are as follows: The appellant before us is a firm carrying on business under the name of Sugan Chand Saraogi at 68A, Nalini Sett Road, Calcutta. From the deed of partner. ship being annexure A to the original petition under Article 226 it transpires that the business of the partnership is to act as brokers in jute only, but the partners may by mutual consent embark upon...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›