Kolkata Court April 1968 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.
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Ellerman Lines Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-10-1968
Reported in: [1970]75ITR47(Cal)
P.B. Mukharji ,J.1. This is a reference under Section 66 (1) of the IndianIncome-tax Act, 1922. The two questions of law which have been referredto this court for an answer as follows : '(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the destination earninngs collected in India should be considered as part of the Indian earnings in determining the assessee's Indian income under Rule 33 of the Income-tax Rules ? (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in allowing the claim of the assessee for the investment allowance under the U. K. Act (corresponding to development rebate under the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922) in the computation of its total world income for the purpose of determining the assessee's Indian income under Rule 33 of the Income-tax Rules, 1922 ' 2. The facts giving rise to these questions of law may now be briefly stated. The assessment years 1960-61 and 1961-62 are the r...
Superintendent and Remembrancer of Legal Affairs, West Bengal on Behal ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-05-1968
Reported in: AIR1968Cal512,1968CriLJ1396
N.C. Talukdar, J.1. This is an appeal by the Superintendent and Remembrancer of Legal Affairs West Bengal, on behalf of the State of West Bengal against an order dated the 24th April, 1967 passed by Shri A. K. Roy, Magistrate, first class, Sealdah, in case No C-1848 of 1964 acquitting the accused-respondent under Section 251A(11) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, of charges under Sections 417 and 419 I. P. C.2. The facts leading on to the impugned order can be put in a short compass. In response to an employment notice by the Railway Service Commission, the accused-respondent applied for one of the posts of Inspector of Works and in his application he described his caste as 'Dandasi' which is a scheduled caste. He was ultimately appointed in one of the vacancies reserved for the scheduled caste and was posted in the South-East Zone on 22-2-56. It subsequently transpired that the accused-respondent belonged to the 'Kapu' (Telaga) community which has not been declared as a scheduled cas...
Supdt. and Remembrancer of Legal Affairs, West Bengal Vs. Vimla Dassi ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-05-1968
Reported in: AIR1968Cal540,1968CriLJ1411
ORDERT.P. Mukherji, J. 1. These six Rules are taken up for bearing together as the same questions of law and fact are involved in all of them.The Rules in Criminal Revision Cases Nos. 119, 120, 126 and 191 of 1968 arise out of trials being held in the courts of Presidency Magistrates at Calcutta while the Rules in Criminal Revision Cases Nos. 132 and 235 of 1968 arise out of trials in the courts of Special Judges created under the West Bengal Criminal Law Amendment (Special Courts) Act 1949. The trials in the courts of the presidency magistrates are in respect of offences under the Indian Penal Code and also an offence under the Imports and Exports (Control) Article 1947.2. All tht cases were initiated on complaints although all of them were preceded by police investigations held under Chapter XIV of tht Code of Criminal Procedure In the cases pending before the magistrates, permission was taken by the investigating officer from the magistrates concerned under Section155(2) of the Code...
Mrs. Shamsun Nehar Mansur Vs. the Commissioner of Estate Duty, W.B.i.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-03-1968
Reported in: AIR1969Cal139
P.B. Mukharji, J.1. This is a problem in Estate Duty, under the Estates Duty Act. The reference is made under Section 64(1) of the Estate Duty Act by the Central Board of Direct Taxes and raises the following question to be answered by the Court:--'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the value of the house property No. 33 Apcar Garden, was correctly included in the principal value of the estate of the deceased, as property passing or deemed to pass on his death?'2. The property is a house property No. 33 Apcar Garden, Asansol. The title deed of this property, a copy of which has been produced by the Revenue Authorities and which is directed to be kept as part of the records of this proceeding, is an Indenture of Conveyance dated the 21st February, 1947. At the outset it must be said, this is not at all or by any means or by the remotest suggestion a Deed of Gift by the husband to the wife. This is a document of sale where the vendor Henry Earnest Cecil Grant of A...
Mrs. Shamsun Nehar Mansur Vs. Controller of Estate Duty, West Bengal I ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-03-1968
Reported in: [1969]71ITR301(Cal)
P. B. MUKHERJI J. - This is a problem in estate duty, under the Estate Duty Act. The reference is made under section 64(1) of the Estate Duty Act by the Central Board of Direct Taxes and raises the following question to be answered by the court :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the value of the house property No. 33, Apcar Garden, was correctly included in the principal value of the estate of the deceased, as property passing or deemed to pass on his death ?'The property is a house property No. 33, Apcar Garden, Asansol. The title deed of this property, a copy of which has been produced by the revenue authorities and which is directed to be kept as part of the records of this proceeding, is an indenture of conveyance dated the 21st February, 1947. At the outset, it must be said, this is not at all or by any means or by the document of sale where the vendor, Henry Earnest Cecil Grant of Asansol, was selling this property to Begum Shamsun Nehar Mansur. This de...
Ram Krishna Kulwant Rai and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-02-1968
Reported in: AIR1969Cal18
ORDERD. Basu, J. 1. The petitioners in these five cases have brought Petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution to challenge the validity of a step taken by the respondents to prevent undesirable persons from carrying on dealings with the Government of India or its agencies in the sphere of public business or like transactions. 2. Though these petitions raise common issues, it would be convenient to take up the facts of C. R. 710(W)/66 in the first instance. C. R. 710 (W)/66 3. The petitioner firm, Ram Krishan Kulwant Rai, is a firm carrying on, inter alia, the business of export and import of Iron and Steel materials and acts as 'handling agents' of the Union of India (Respondent No. 1) in respect of the imported Iron and Steel materials. 4. At the material time iron and steel was a controlled commodity under the provisions of the Iron & Steel (Control) Order, 1956, under which no one could purchase or sell iron and steel materials except in pursuance of permits issued by the Iro...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›