Kolkata Court March 1964 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.
Orient Trading Co Ltd Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax (Central), Calcut ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-20-1964
Reported in: [1965]58ITR553(Cal)
SANKAR PRASAD MITRA J. - This is a reference under section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922. The assessee is a shareholder of several limited companies. The assessment years are 1954-55, 1955-56, 1956-57 and 1957-58. The corresponding accounting years are years ending on July 31, 1953, 1954, 1955 and 1956 respectively. We are concerned in this reference principally with the assessment year 1954-55. For this assessment year the assessee had claimed a loss of Rs. 9,40,467 on account of depreciation in the value of shares in the stock and Rs. 28,518 on sale of shares.The Income-tax Officer by his order dated November 29, 1957, disallowed the first loss and allowed the second loss only to the extent of Rs. 20,853. The Income-tax Officer was of the view that only shares which were held for not less than 24 months before the sale could be taken as part of the assessees trading stock. He also held that the holding of shares in 9 companies which according to him were associated concern...
Rampiyari Khemka Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-19-1964
Reported in: AIR1964Cal367,68CWN1144,[1966]61ITR600(Cal)
ORDERD.N. Sinha, J. 1. This application relates to the income-tax assessment of the petitioner Rampiyari Khemka, vidow of late Mahadeo Prasad Khemka, residing at 48, Nandlal Mitra Lane, Howrah. The facts are briefly as follows:According to the petitioner, in or about February, 1961 she filed a return of her income for the assessment year 1960-61 in the office of the Income-tax Officer, Howrah, pursuant to a notice under section 22(1) of the Income-tax Act, therein-after referred to as the 'said Act'). It is stated that the Income-tax Officer called for returns of the earlier years and the petitioner filed a return for the assessment years 1953-54 to 1959-60. According to the Commissioner of Income-tax, as stated by him in the impugned order under section 33B of the said Act, dated 7th February, 1963 the assessee filed a voluntary return of income for the assessment years 195^-54 to 1960-61, all date 14-2-61 excepting the last one which was dated 13-2-61. Cognisance of the returns was t...
Kala Miah and ors. Vs. S.C. Roy and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-19-1964
Reported in: AIR1964Cal409,68CWN669
ORDERD.N. Sinha, J. 1. The petitioners in this case are three in number. They are owners of cattle viz, cows and buffaloes. It is stated in the petition that for nearly 100 years they have been carrying on business in the sale and purchase of cattle and supplying milk in different parts of the city of Calcutta, within the area known as 'Saudagarpatty-Cossipur-Chitpur' area. The West Bengal Cattle Licensing Act (West Bengal Act I of 1959) (hereinafter referred to as the 'said Act') came into operation on the 20th March, 1959. Under the provisions of Sub-section (2) of Section 1 of the said Act, it was to come into force in such urban areas and with effect from such dates as the State Government may by notification in the Official Gazette, appoint. On 25th June, 1960 a notification was published, in an Extra ordinary issue of the Calcutta Gazette, being Notification No. 3406-Milk, whereby 15th July, 1980 was fixed as the date on which the said Act should come into operation in ward Nos. ...
Subodh Kumar Talukdar Vs. Tincowrie Sen
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-18-1964
Reported in: AIR1965Cal67,68CWN989
Banerjee, J. 1. Ejectment suits 2044 and 2043 of 1960 were leave analogously by the Judge, IX Bench of the City Civil Court, Calcutta, and were dismissed by one and the same judgment. Against the two decrees made in the, two suits, the appellants, preferred two first Appeals to this Court, or January 18, 1963, being F. A. T. 202 and 203 of 1963. The memorandum of appeal in F. A. T. 202 of 1963 was Wed accompanied by certified copies of both the judgment and the decree, as required under Order XLI, Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The memorandum of appeal in F. A. T. 203 of 1963, however, was filed accompained by the certified copy of the decree only.2. The appellants should have applied for an order dispensing with the filing of the certified copy of the judgment in F. A. T. 203, because their intention was to have F. A. T. 202 and F. A. T. 203 of 1963 heard together in this Court and, in that event the filing of a second certified copy of the judgment was wholly unnecessary. The...
Muralidhar Garodia and ors. Vs. the State
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-18-1964
Reported in: 1965CriLJ825
ORDERR.N. Dutt, J.1. This re visional application is directed against an order of conviction and sentence under Sections 3 and 4 of Act 32 of 1957.2. The prosecution case is as follows:3. Petitioner No. 1, Muralidhar Garodia, is a lessee in respect of a Gaddi at 68, Cotton Street, Calcutta. On certain information that the gaddi in question was being used as a common gaming house, the officer-in-charge of Bara Bazar Police Station searched the gaddi on July 22, 1962 and arrested the petitioners while Gambling in Rains and seized some instruments of gaming, some cash money and some documents.4. Petitioner No. 1 was thereafter tried under Sections 3 and 4 of the said Act and the other petitioners under Section 4 of the said Act. The petitioners pleaded not guilty. Their defence was that there was no gambling in the gaddi where normal business in silver was transacted. The learned Magistrate has convicted petitioner No. 1 under Sections 3 and 4 of the said Act and sentenced him to a fine o...
Lalit Mohan Dey Vs. Smt. Satadalbasini Dasi
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-16-1964
Reported in: AIR1965Cal55
P.N. Mookerjee, J. 1. These two appeals are directed against a decree, passed by the learned trial Judge, allowing the plaintiff's claim for ejectment but granting the defendant three years' time or a grace period of three years to vacate the suit property. F. A. No. 144 of 1960 is by the defendant, wherein she challenges the decree for ejectment. The other appeal (F. A. No. 97 of 1960) is by the plaintiff, who has felt aggrieved by, the above provision for time or grace period in the decree of the court below. This latter appeal, however, has spent itself and become infructuous as the grace period in question expired even before its hearing and the only order, which we need pass in this appeal, is to dismiss it on the said ground. F. A. No. 97 of 1960, is, accordingly, dismissed without costs. 2. Turning, now, to the defendant tenant's appeal we may at once say that it involves a short question as to the defendant's status, namely, whether she is a thika tenant, entitled to protection...
The Gift Tax Officer 'K' Ward and Anr. Vs. Kastur Chand JaIn
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-16-1964
Reported in: AIR1965Cal70,68CWN685,[1964]53ITR411(Cal)
Bachawat, J.1. On or about August 8, 1957 the respondent made a gift of 250 ordinary shares of the face value of Rs. 100/- each in R. McDill and Co. (Private) Ltd. (hereafter referred to as the K. M. Company) and 100 ordinary shares of the face value of Rs. 100/- each in Misrilal Dharamchand (Private) Ltd. (hereafter referred to as the M. D. Company) to his daughter. On or about July 28, 1959 he submitted a voluntary return of the gift to the Gift Tax Officer valuing the shares at their face value of Rs. 35,000/-. By his order dated February 24, 1960, the Gift Tax Officer rejected their valuation and acting under Section 15(3) of the Gift Tax Act 1958 determined the total value of the shares to be Rs. 2,68,503/- and the gift tax to be Rs. 21020.36. On April 19, 1960, the respondent was served with the notice of demand under Section 31 of the Act, On May 19, 1960 he obtained a rule calling upon the Gift Tax Officer and the other appellants to show cause why the order of assessment and t...
Mohini Mohan Chakravartty Vs. Mohanlal Thalia and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-16-1964
Reported in: AIR1964Cal470
Witter, J. 1. This is an appeal from an order directing the Official Liquidator of the Bengal Textiles Association (In Liquidation) to pay the sums of Rs. 3,591/12/0 and Rs. 6,287/10/6 or the dividends already declared on two shares of the said company to the petitioners Mohanlal Thalia and Dhaliram Thalia. Notice of this application was served on the Official Liquidator of the said Bengal Textiles Association and the Official Assignee of Calcutta.2. The facts leading to the making of the application are as follows: One Sriniwas Ladia carried on business in partnership with Ranglal Ladia under the name and style of 'Shyamlal Sriniwas' each having eight annas share therein. Thepartnership firm became the holder of four shares in the Bengal Textiles Association under one scripNo. 0143/4 of the total face value of Rs. 60,000/-. The partnership stood dissolved in the year 1949but the share scrip continued to stand in the nameof the firm. The Thalias allege that Sriniwas owed a sum of Rs. 3...
Subodh Kumar Dhar Ray and ors. Vs. State on First Information Report o ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-11-1964
Reported in: 1966CriLJ323
K.C. Sen, J.1. This appeal is at the instance of Subodh Kumar Dhar Roy, Nityananda Sarma and Ashutosh Chandra. They were placed on dial before the learned Sessions Judge of Nadia with the aid of a Jury under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code. The gentlemen of the Jury returned a unanimous verdict of guilty against all the three appellants. The learned Sessions Judge agreeing with and accepting the verdict of the Jury convicted the accused under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced them to undergo imprisonment for life by his order dated 6th February, 1961.2. The present appeal has been preferred against the said order of conviction and sentence. Before dealing with the points of law it is first of all necessary to set out the prosecution case in brief. The victim Bimal Kanti Das, son of P. W. 1. Rajendralal Das lived with his parents and other family members at the village Gouripur Chuadanga within the police station Chakdah. His father is a practising Homeopathi...
Bibhuti Bhushan Bank and anr. Vs. Sadhan Chandra Sheet and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-10-1964
Reported in: AIR1965Cal199,68CWN1043
C.N. Laik, J.1. A tamarind tree, the small plot of land on which it stands and the alleged mis-appropriation of 15 seers of tamarind led to the institution of the suit for declaration of title, injunction and for damages, total value being laid at only Rs. 20/- put of which this Second Appeal arises. The plaintiffs being unsuccessful in both the Courts below, fought the battle royal for two days in this Court through their learned Advocate Mr. A. D. Mukherjee, defended by Mr. P. N. Mitra, the learned Advocate for the respondent.2. The plaintiffs claim that the land and the tree appertain to their Bastu plot (No. 6930). The defendants on the other hand, claim that they appertain to their tank and its banks (Plot No. 6929), being on the west of the plaintiffs' plot, having no gap between the two. Plaintiffs rest their title on two Kobalas dated May 16 and June 4, both of the year 1891. Defendants rest their title on an unregistered Patta of 1282 B.S. (1875) followed by a Kobala of the ye...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »