Kolkata Court June 1969 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. Royal Boot House
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-19-1969
Reported in: [1970]75ITR507(Cal),[1970]25STC243(Cal)
Sabyasachi Mukherji, J.1. The method of accounting followed by the assessee and accepted by the department is mercantile. For the assessment year 1961-62, the assessee had made provision in its account for the sum of Rs. 22,642 on account of the sales tax payable by the assessee. The assessee claimed deduction of the said sum in its income-tax assessment. The Income-tax Officer disallowed the claim on the ground that the amount represented a mere provision for taxes which had neither been paid nor ascertained by the sales tax authorities. The assessee preferred an appeal before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner who confirmed the order of the Income-tax Officer. Thereupon, the assessee went up in appeal before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal. The Tribunal found that, having regard to the scheme of the Sales Tax Act, the charge is created not upon the assessment but as soon as the sales are effected. In that view of the matter and inasmuch as there was no dispute that the amount of ...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Ganga Properties Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-17-1969
Reported in: [1970]77ITR637(Cal)
Sankar Prasad Mitra, J.1. This is a reference under Section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922. The assessment year is 1957-58. The corresponding previous year was the financial year ending on the 31st March, 1957. At the relevant time the assessee was a private limited company. In the years preceding the financial year aforesaid the assessee was the owner of premises No. 17B, Gurusaday Road, Calcutta. The assessee claimed for the assessment year 1957-58, that the bona fide annual value of this property was not assessable in the assessee's hands as the property had been sold on the 29th March, 1956, to Messrs. Punjab Produce & Investment Co. Ltd. before the beginning of the accounting year in question. It was stated that under an oral agreement dated March 27, 1956, the assessee agreed to sell the property to the aforesaid purchaser and in accordance with this agreement delivery of possession was given to the purchaser on March 29, 1956. It was stated further that the purchaser p...
Puranlal Lakhanpal Vs. Dr. P.C. Ghosh and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-16-1969
Reported in: AIR1970Cal118,74CWN228
D. Basu, J. 1. This appeal is against the order passed by B.C. Mitra, J. dated February 6, 1968 by which the petition brought by the appellant under Article 226 of the Constitution was dismissed in limine. In that petition, the petitioner challenged the title of respondents 1 to 11 to constitute and to act as the Council of Ministers for the State of West Bengal headed by respondent No. 1, P.C. Ghosh as the Chief Minister, and asked for a writ of quo warranto 'quashing the warrant of their appointment dated November 21, 1967 and December 4, 1967 in respect of the various members of the Council of Ministers.' The main ground upon which this petition was founded was thatthe Governor had no power under Article 164 of the Constitution of India to dismiss the previous Council of Ministers, on the ground that they had ceased to lose the support of the majority of the Legislative Assembly of this State, -- as a result of which vacancy was created for the appointment of respondents 1 to 11 as ...
Kanailal Manna and ors. Vs. Bhabataran Santra and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-13-1969
Reported in: AIR1970Cal99
Anil K. Sen, J.1. This appeal from appellate decree is at the instance of defendant Nos. 4, 5 and 6 who are the transferees from defendant Nos. 2 and 3. The appeal arises out of a suit for declaration of title and possession of the properties described in the two schedules to the plaint brought by the three plaintiffs Bhabataran, Nrityataran and Gobardhan.2. On May 19, 1913 one Kiranbala Dassi, a child widow sold away all her husband's properties to her husband's brother Srinibas the father of defendants 2 and 3 and came to live with her father and her brothers, the plaintiffs as aforesaid; the three plots of land which constitute the suit property, were purchased by her by three documents respectively dated May 18, 1924, November 19, 1928 and December 20, 1934; she died while possessing and enjoying these properties in 1360 B. S.; and it appears that later in her life she had separated even from her brothers, the plaintiffs, and was living in a homestead situate on a part of the suit ...
The New Central Jute Mills Co. Ltd. Vs. the Assistant Collector of Cus ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-12-1969
Reported in: AIR1970Cal212
D. Basu, J.1. This appeal is against the order of B. C. Mitra, J. passed on March 6, 1969 in Matter No. 344 of 1968, on an application made by the Assistant Collector of Customs, the respondent in the parties under Art 226 of the Constitution. That petition had been brought by the appellant against the respondents Customs authorities and the Union of India, challenging the validity of the order of authorisation dated May 11, 1968 (vide page 79 of the paper book), under which the Preventive Officer of the Customs Department, respondent No. 2, was authorised under Section 105 of the Customs Act to enter into the premises of the appellant and to search for and seize and take possession of their goods and documents and things, pursuing the belief of the Customs authorities that goods liable to confiscation under the said Act were secreted in the premises of the appellant. Certain documents. Inter alia, were seized from the custody of the appellant in pursuance of this order and the petitio...
Dhrubadeo Tewari and anr. Vs. Thakolal Ganguly and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-12-1969
Reported in: 1970CriLJ1687
ORDERN.C. Talukdar, J.1. This Rule was issued upon the two opposite parties, viz., Thakolal Ganguly, Secretary, Council of Shebaits and Provat Kumae Mukherjee, Secretary Kalighat Temple Committee to show cause as to why they should not be dealt with for contempt of this Court foe having violated the order of injunction passed by this Court on the 25th of October, 1968 in Civil Rule No. 7348 (w) of 1968.2. The facts leading on to the Rule may be put in short compass. The present two petitioners Dhrubadeo Tewari and Bhagaban Panda as well as one Kanai Lal Chakraborty describing themselves as Sathi Brahmins by profession-a class of pujaris who accompany the pilgrims inside the temple at Kalighat and offer pujas to the deity on their behalf filed an application in the Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and obtained a Rule Nisi on the 25th October, 1968, calling upon the four respondents including the Kalighat Temple Committee and t...
Shri Krishnagopal Dutta Vs. Regional Transport Authority, Burdwan and ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-10-1969
Reported in: AIR1970Cal104,73CWN714
ORDERB.C. Mitra, J.1. The petitioner is a permit holder in respect, of the route Burdwan to Guskara via Suri Road and owns a stage carriage being No. W.G.H. 8016. There is another permanent stage carriage route namely Guskara to Bon-Naba-gram. The route between Burdwan to Bon-Nabagram via Suri Road covers the whole of the route Burdwan to Guskara and proceeds further on to a distance of 4 to 5 miles.2. On February 13, 1969, the respondent No. 5 (Dayamoyee Transport Service) applied for a temporary permit for 4 months from February 16, 1969, to June 15, 1969, in the route Burdwan to Bon-Kabagram via Suri Road for two Up and Down trips daily. On this application the Secretary to the Regional Transport Authority the respondent No. 4 (B. K. Majumdar, Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Burdwan) made an order on the next day February 14, 1969, granting a temporary permit for four months with effect from February 16, 1969. It is this order which is the subject-matter of challenge in thi...
The Jeewanlal (1929) Ltd., Calcutta Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, We ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-10-1969
Reported in: AIR1971Cal258,[1971]79ITR147(Cal)
Sankar Prasad Mitra, J.1. In this Reference under Section 60 (1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, the assessment year is 1949-50. The corresponding accounting year is the calendar year ending 31-12-1948. The assessee isan Indian Company which manufactures aluminium-ware and utensils. The assessee during the relevant accounting year had a shop at Rangoon in Burma for selling some of its manufactured products. The goods that were sold in Burma were all manufactured in India but were sent to Burma for sale. The invoice prices of these goods corresponded with their prices in India and included the manufacturing profits in India and also part of the merchanting profits. The differences between the invoice price and the sale price in Burma were shown as profit accruing or arising in Burma.2. In the assessee's Indian assessment, the Income-tax Officer accepted the assessee's method of accounting. He computed the sum of Rs. 9,688/- as the assessee's loss in Burma for the assessment year 194...
Supriyo Sarkar Vs. Sunil Ranjan Sarkar
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-09-1969
Reported in: AIR1970Cal81,1970CriLJ208,75CWN548
ORDERN.C. Talukdar, J. 1. This Rule arises out of an order dated the 7th February, 1960 passed by Shri S. C. Roy, Additional Chief Presidency Magistrate. Calcutta, in case No. C/833 of 1968, upon an application filed by the accused-petitioner Shri Supriya Sarkar for dropping the prosecution, holding that the point raised in the said petition can only be decided by the High Court under Section 185(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and directing the accused-petitioner to move the said Court for the necessary decision, 2. The facts leading on to the present Rule can be put in a short compass. A novel named 'Patak', written in Bengali by the accused No. 1, Shri Samaresh Basu, was printed and published by the present petitioner, Shri Supriya Sarkar in the Puja Number of the 'Amrita' in the year 1375 B. S. In course of reading the said novel, the complaints concerned were of the view that the said novel contained several vulgar, indecent and obscene passages tending to corrupt the minds a...
Corporation of Calcutta Vs. Calcutta Wholesale Consumers Co-operative ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-06-1969
Reported in: AIR1970Cal120,1970CriLJ340
Bagchi, J.1. This is an appeal on taking special leave under Section 417(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure at the instance of the Calcutta Corporation against the order of the acquittal passed by the Municipal Magistrate, Calcutta acquitting the respondent of an offence punishable under Section 16(1)(a)(i) read with Section 7 of the Food Adulteration Act, 1954. The accused respondent No. 1 is the Calcutta Wholesale Consumers Cooperative Society Ltd. (Retail Section) which is the main accused. Timir Haran Sen Gupta, Executive Officer and Deputy Registrar of the organisation is the accused no. 2 and Niswanath Bhattacharjee, Sales-in-charge and seller of the organisation is the accused no. 3. From the records it appears that the complainant Corporation of Calcutta presented through Dr. R. Chandra, Food Inspector, a petition against the accused respondents before the Court of the Third Presidency Magistrate of the First Class specially empowered to take cognizance under Section 190 (1) ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »