Kolkata Court January 1966 Judgments
In Re: Bangeswari Cotton Mills Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-17-1966
Reported in: [1967]37CompCas195(Cal),70CWN486
Sankar Prasad Mitra, J.1. This is an application under Section 391 of the Companies Act, 1956. The petition has not yet been admitted and a question has been raised as to whether notice of this application, under Section 394A, should be given to the Central Government before any order is made. Section 394A has been introduced by the Companies (Amendment) Act, 1965, which received the assent of the President on 25th September, 1965, and was published in the Gazette of India on 27th September, 1965. The section runs thus:'The court shall give notice of every application made to it under Section 391 or 394 to the Central Government, and shall take into consideration the representations, if any, made to it by that Government before passing any order under any of these sections.'2. As the point is of first impression and the application under Section 391 is at the moment being moved ex parte, I requested Mr. B. Das, the learned junior standing counsel, to assist me in this matter. I am grat...
Tag this Judgment!In Re: Tara Chand Podder
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-17-1966
Reported in: AIR1968Cal310
ORDERS.P. Mitra, J. 1. This is an application under Section 391 of the Companies Act, 1956. The petition has not yet been admitted and a question has been raised as to whether notice of this application under Section 394A should be given to the Central Government before any order is made. Section 394A has been introduced by the Companies (Amendment) Act, 1965 which received the assent of the President on September 25, 1965, and was published in the Gazette of India on September 27. 1985 The section runs thus:-- 'The Court shall Rive notice of every application made to it under Section 391 or 394 to the Central Government, and shall take into consideration the representations, if any, made to it by that Government before passing any order under any of these sections.' 2. As the point is of first impression and the application under Section 391 is at the moment being moved ex parte I requested Mr. B. Das, the learned Junior Standing Counsel to assist me in this matter. I am grateful to M...
Tag this Judgment!The Union of India (Uoi) Vs. Alliance Assurance Co. Ltd. and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-14-1966
Reported in: AIR1967Cal47
G.K. Mitter, J. 1. This is au appeal by the Union of India representing the Eastern Railway Administration from a decree for Rs. 11, 928.37 in favour of the respondent Alliance Assurance Company Limited in sespect of a claim for loss and/or non-delivery of certain goods, to wit certain tyres and tubes specified in the plaint and consigned from Bansabali on the Eastern Railway to Nagpur.2. The consignment was effected by the Goodyear Tyre and Rubber Company of India Limited on April 7, 1953. It consisted of 467 packages of tyres and other rubber accessories. The goods were covered by an insurance policy of the Alliance Assurance Company Limited. sonic of these packages were never delivered at the destination station. The Goodyear Tyre and Rubber Company Limited claimed from the plaintiff as an insurer and the latter paid to the Goodyear Tyre and Rubber Company Limited a sum of Rs. 11,928-10-0 being the value ot the non-delivered goods. There is no dispute as to the loss or the shortage....
Tag this Judgment!North Adjai Coal Co. (P) Ltd. Vs. Commercial Tax Officer and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-14-1966
Reported in: AIR1966Cal629,[1966]17STC514(Cal)
B.C. Mitra, J. 1. This appeal is directed against a judgment and order of J. P, Mitter, J. dated August 11, 1961. By this judgment a rule nisi obtained by the appellant on a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution was discharged.2. The appellant is a private company, and is the owner of a coal mine in the district of Burdwan. Pursuant to an agreement between the Government of India and the Government of Pakistan, the former agreed to release large quantities of coal for consumption in East Pakistan. The appellant, as one of the colliery owners, delivered coal to the Fuel Inspector, Eastern Bengal Railway, East Pakistan, of the total value of Rs. 88,929-10-0. In respect of this supply of coal bills were drawn by the appellant in the name of the Deputy Coal Commissioner (Production), Ministry of Steel and Mines, Government of India, Calcutta, who was to realise the price of coal supplied to Pakistan. With regard to this supply of coal to Pakistan, the appellant has been made liabl...
Tag this Judgment!Abdul Kader Laskar and ors. Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-10-1966
Reported in: AIR1967Cal99,70CWN623
Bose, C.J.1. This is an appeal from an order of Banerjee, J. dated 9th August 1965 discharging a Rule issued under Article 226 of the Constitution.2. The appellants arc owners of lands measuring .49 acres comprised in Dag Nos. 275-78 in mouza Ukhila Paikpara. P. S. Sonarpur in the District of 24-Parganas.3. On 3rd August 1961, a notification was published in the Calcutta Gazette (Extra-ordinary) under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act dated 3rd August 1961, intimating that 1.68 acres of land in the said village were likely to be needed for a public purpose, viz., construction of Students' Home at the expenses of Ram Krishna Mission.4. On coming to know of the publication of the said notification objections were filed to the proposed acquisition on behalf of the appellants as well as other persons in the locality. In the said objections it is inter alia pointed out that the Ram Krishna Mission had more land by acquisition and/or private purchase at its disposal in the said mouza Ukh...
Tag this Judgment!Sudhir Kumar Ratneswar Saha Vs. Additional Commissioner of Commercial ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-10-1966
Reported in: [1967]20STC9(Cal)
Ajit Nath Roy, J.1. This Rule was obtained by the petitioners against the Additional Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Commercial Tax Officer and the State of West Bengal requiring the opposite parties, respondents, to show cause as to why a writ of certiorari should not issue calling upon the respondents to return all records relating to orders dated 30th April, 1965, passed by the Additional Commissioner 6i Commercial Taxes, West Bengal, in Revision Cases Nos. 533 and 534 of 1964-65 so that conscionable justice may be administered by quashing the orders and also to show cause why a writ of prohibition should not issue commanding the respondents not to proceed on the basis of the orders and/or notice in Form VI dated 22nd February, 1964.2. The order dated 30th April, 1965, is to be found in annexure H to the petition. The order was made on a petition for revision under Section 20(3) of the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, of the order dated 2...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax (Central) Vs. Birla Bros. (Private) Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-07-1966
Reported in: [1969]72ITR44(Cal)
Sen, J. 1. These two references are taken up together for consideration. In Income-tax Reference No. 7 of 1961 the following question was posed for consideration by this court under Section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 (hereinafter called the 'Act'): ' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the sumof Rs. 5,60,199 was an admissible deduction in computing the businessprofits of the assessee ' 2. It appears that the Commissioner of Income-tax suggested certain questions for being sent up to this court for consideration in his application under Section 66(1) of the Act before the Tribunal. The Tribunal, however, only sent up the above question to this court. The matter was, therefore, taken up by the Commissioner of Income-tax under Section 66(2) of the Act to this court. This court asked for a further statement of the case on the following questions framed by it. They are as follows : '1. Whether there was any evidence in support of the Tribunal's finding ...
Tag this Judgment!Khas Kajora Coal Co. Limited Vs. Member, Board of Revenue
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-07-1966
Reported in: [1966]18STC79(Cal)
Sinha, J.1. This is a reference under Section 21(3) of the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act).2. Before I come to the question posed before us, I shall briefly enumerate the facts. The assessee, Messrs Khas Kajora Coal Co. Ltd. is a registered dealer under the said Act. We are concerned here with the period 1st April, 1949, to 31st December, 1949. In respect of this period, the assessee made certain payments of tax particulars whereof are given below :Date Amount20-1-50 ... ... Rs. 4,452 13 020-1-50 ... ... Rs. 3,879 6 01-3-50 ... ... Rs. 1,894 1 97-7-50 ... ... Rs. 7,548 11 3--------------Total ... Rs. 17,775 0 0--------------3. On the 28th January, 1950, the assessee filed a return for the period mentioned above, but in the return no challans were filed and indeed on the date on which the return was filed, the last two items mentioned above had not been paid at all. Under the said Act and the Rules made thereunder, 1st March, 1950, was the ...
Tag this Judgment!Malik Ram Vs. Hindusthan Cables Ltd. and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-04-1966
Reported in: [1968]38CompCas500(Cal),72CWN398,(1968)IILLJ371Cal
A.C. Sen, J. 1. The petitioner is an ex-employee of Hindusthan Cables Limited and is aggrieved by the order of dismissal passed against him on the 23rd of February, 1963. He has asked for a writ in the nature of prohibition commanding the respondents to forbear from giving effect to the directionscontained in the letter dated February 23, 1963, that is to say, the letter by which he was dismissed from service with immediate effect.2. His complaint is that though he was asked to show cause why he should not be dismissed, he was not supplied with the copy of the report submitted by the enquiring officer to the dismissing authority. It is not disputed that an enquiry was made into the charges levelled against him. He does not appear to be seriously aggrieved by anything that took place at the stage of the enquiry. As a matter of fact, the rule has been issued only on ground No. 1, which runs as follows:'......the petitioner was not supplied with necessary statements andeven a copy of the ...
Tag this Judgment!Official Trustee of West Bengal Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, West B ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-04-1966
Reported in: [1968]67ITR218(Cal)
SINHA J. - This is a reference under section 66 (1) of the Income-tax Act, 1922 (hereinafter referred to as the 'said Act'), which arose out of nine applications in respect of assessments of the applicant, the Official Trustee of West Bengal, as trustee of the trust estate of Chitra Dassi, for the assessment years 1943-44 to 1951-52. In all these nine assessments, the matter went up to the Appellate tribunal and applications were made for referring certain questions to the High Court. The Tribunal referred three questions which are set out in paragraph 13 of the 'statement of the case', set out at page 5 of the main paper-book. These questions, having come up before a Bench of this court presided over by G. K. Mitter J., the questions were reframed and a supplementary statement of the case has now been filed by the Tribunal. The facts in this case are stated to be as follows : One Smt. Chitra Dassi had five sons. She was the owner of certain lands situated at Sinduriaputty Hoozoor Baga...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›