Kolkata Court January 1967 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.
Setabganj Sugar Mills Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-05-1967
Reported in: [1967]65ITR201(Cal)
BANERJEE J. - The question of law referred to us, under section 66(2) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, is :'Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the business activities of the company, to wit, manufacture and sale of sugar and sale and purchase of gunnies, jute and mustard seeds constituted the same business within the meaning of section 24(2) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 192 ?'The circumstances in which the aforesaid reference was made are hereinafter stated in brief : The assessee is a public limited company and was incorporated, on August 27, 1934, primarily to take over certain sugar mills, which were being run under the managing agency of Messrs. Surajmull Nagarmull. The memorandum of association of the assessee-company also authorised it to carry on the business as buyer, seller and dealer of jute, hemp, oil seeds, etc. Since the time the assessee to over the sugar mills and up to August 31, 1944, it carried on the business of manufacture and sale of sugar onl...
Union of India (Uoi) Vs. Jatindra Narayan Majumdar and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-03-1967
Reported in: AIR1967Cal613
Sinha, C.J.1. The facts in this case are shortly as follows.2. In 1948 by Act 12 of 1948 was established the Rahahilitation Finance Adminstration, the main purpose of which was the giving of financial assistance to displaced persons, to enable them to settle in business or industry. The respondent No. 1, Shri Jatindra Narayan Majumdar claims to be a refugee from East Pakistan. Prior to 1952, he took a loan from the said Administration of a sum of Rs. 35,000 in connection with his cloth business carried on in Calcutta. Respondents Nos. 2 and 3 stood as sureties for the re-payment of the said loan. On the 29th of August. 1952 a fire broke out in the said shop and it is claim-ed that the entire stock was burnt out and destroyed The stock was insured with the Central Insurance Company Limited and as the laid Insurance Company failed to pay the claim, the respondent No. 1 filed a suit being suit No. 3284 of 1954 in the Original Side of this Court, claiming the value of the stock amounting t...
Jeewanram Gangaram Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, West Bengal.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-02-1967
Reported in: [1967]64ITR483(Cal)
BANERJEE J. - This reference, under section 66 (1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), was made in the circumstances hereinafter stated in brief.Under an instrument of partnership, dated March 15, 1938, the firm of Messrs. Jewanram Gangaram was constituted of seven partners, viz.,(i) Kanayalal Mimani,(ii) Mulchand Mimani,(iii) Surajmal Mimani,(iv) Chantratan Mimani,(v) Lunkaram Mimani,(vi) Chaitandas Miamni, and(vii) Lalchmandas Mimani.This firm was granted registration, under section 26A of the Act.One of the partners, named Lachmandas Mimani died on February 24, 1947, leaving him surviving two minor sons, named Gokuldas Mimani and Jamnadas Mimani, and his widow, named Smt. Ram Piyari Devi. Partner Chandratan Mimani used to represent his undivided Hindu family in the partnership of Jewanram Gangaram. There was a partition in this family and Chandratan and his brother, Chhoganlal, separated. Consequent upon the death of Lachmandas Mimani and the sep...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›