Kolkata Court December 1970 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.
Nalini Kanta Laskar Vs. Satish Chandra Rana and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-15-1970
Reported in: AIR1971Cal275
ORDERA.N. Sen, J.1. This is an application by one of the judgment-debtors for setting aside the sale of premises No. 38, Kali Krishna Tagore Street, Calcutta held on 25th of March 1970 by the Sheriff of this Court in execution of a decree.2. The said premises No. 38, Kali Krishna Tagore Street appears to be heavily encumbered. It appears that there are 4 mortgages on the said property and the said mortgages have all been mentioned in the Sale proclamation. One of the mortgagees. United Bank of India Ltd has filed a suit in this Court for enforcement of the mortgage and in the said suit a Receiver has been appointed over the said premises No. 38, Kali Krishna Tagore Street. Calcutta and the Receiver has been and is still realising the rents, issues and profits of the said premises The Receiver was there when the plaintiff decree-holder took steps for execution of this decree and the plaintiff decree-holder after obtaining necessary leave of this Court to proceed in execution against the...
State of West Bengal Vs. Oswal JaIn and Co.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-14-1970
Reported in: AIR1971Cal457
M.M. Dutt, J. 1. This is a defendant's appeal and it arises out of a proceeding for assessment of compensation of a requisitioned premises.2. The defendant State of West Bengal requisitioned the ground floor portion of 7/1E, Lindsey Street and 7/1D, Lindsey Street situate at the junction of Madge Lane and Lindsey Street facing the Hog Market, under Section 3 of the West Bengal Premises Requisition and Control (Temporary Provisions) Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The requisitioned premises comprise a floor area of 2521 square feet for the room and an area of 1677 square feet for the Mezanine floor and other spaces. The L. A. Collector on behalf of the Government offered a sum of Rs. 1450/- per month inclusive of all taxes and costs of essential repairs as monthly compensation for the requisitioned premises. The respondent not having agreed to the said amount of monthly compensation as assessed by the L. A. Collector there was a reference to the Arbitrator for the assess...
Hindusthan Stationery Works (Pvt.) Ltd. Vs. Member, Board of Revenue
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-11-1970
Reported in: [1971]27STC394(Cal)
Sankar Prasad Mitra, J. 1. In this reference under Section 21(1) of the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941, the following questions have been referred to this court:(i) Whether there are admissible evidence and vital defects in the declarations in form XXIV furnished by the petitioner to justify disallowance of the deductions claimed under Section 5(2)(a)(ii), Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941, in respect of the sales for Rs. 83,921 to Messrs Roy & Co. prior to 7th January, 1957;(ii) Whether there are admissible evidence and vital defects in the declarations in form XXIV furnished by the petitioner to justify disallowance of the deductions claimed under Section 5(2)(a)(ii), Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941, in respect of sales for Rs. 19,393-12-0 to Messrs Roy & Co. between the 7th January, 1957, and the 23rd February, 1957.2. The applicant is a registered dealer and had claimed the aforesaid exemptions in respect of sales for the periods mentioned above. At the relevant time ...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. R. Shantilal and Co.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-10-1970
Reported in: [1971]82ITR214(Cal)
K.L. Roy, J.1. This is a reference under Section 66(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1922, at the instance of the Commissioner of Income-tax II, Calcutta. The assessment year concerned in this reference is 1956-57, the relevant previous year being 2011 Guzrati Dewali Sambat year corresponding to the period from 26th October, 1954, to 17th June, 1955. The assessee is Messrs. R. Shantilal and Company which was assessed in the status of an unregistered firm for the relevant assessment year, and which sold and transferred its business as a going concern to a private limited company styled as Messrs. R. Shantilal & Company Private Ltd. shortly before theclose of the aforesaid accounting year and the assessee-firm was dissolved on the last date of the accounting year, viz., the 17th June, 1955. In its book of account for the current year which were maintained on the mercantile system of accounting the assessee made the following provisions for its liability under the Sales Tax Act:Rs.(a)Estimated l...
State of West Bengal Vs. Sm. Manish Maity and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-09-1970
Reported in: AIR1971Cal281
Salil Kumar Datta, J.1. This is an appeal by the State of West Bengal against an appellate judgment of reversal.2. The State of West Bengal granted to the plaintiff a settlement of 1306.71 acres of land designated as 'Western Portion of Manasadwip 2nd portion' in the Saugore Island, Pargana Sunclaban, the period of settlement being from 1st April 1921 to 31st March 1947. The terms and conditions of the lease were embodied in a registered document dated September 30, 1921. Clause 3 of the lease provided as follows:'3. That on the conclusion of the term expiring with the 31st March 1947, the lessee will have a right of resettlement of the tenure provided he has behaved satisfactorily and agrees to accept the terms then in force for tenure holders of Saugore Island grant or such terms as Government may then impose and the lessee will have a similar preferential right to future resettlements on the said conditions. Board of Revenue will be the final deciding authority in 1947 and at all fu...
The Indian Iron and Steel Co. Ltd. Vs. Member, Board of Revenue
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-09-1970
Reported in: [1971]27STC373(Cal)
Sankar Prasad Mitra, J. 1. This is a reference under Section 21(1) of the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941. The applicant, Messrs Indian Iron & Steel Co., Ltd., is a dealer registered under the Act. The Commercial Tax Officer, for the assessment year ending on the 31st March, 1953, by an order dated the 11th 'January, 1956, made an assessment for sales tax with regard to the following' transactions of the applicant during the relevant assessment year:--(i) sales of coke-breeze to staff for Rs. 42,314,(ii) supply of stores to the colliery staff amounting to Rs. 21,068, and (iii) value of stores supplied to staff amounting to Rs. 1,372. 2. The applicant's appeal to the Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes failed. The applicant filed a revision petition before the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes. It was submitted to the Commissioner that coke-breeze and stores were supplied to the applicant's staff at concessional rates only to provide amenities to them and there being no motiv...
Mahabir Prosad Poddar Vs. Income-tax Officer, (B), Ward
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-04-1970
Reported in: [1971]82ITR299(Cal)
K.L. Roy, J.1. This petition is purported to be made on behalf of the Hindu undivided family of which Mahabir Prosad Poddar is the karta. No returns were filed by the Hindu undivided family for the assessment years 1957-58 to 1961-62 and no assessments were made in respect of the said years until the time hereinafter mentioned. On the 16th March, 1963, the petitioner, Mahabir Prosad Poddar, as an individual, was served with four notices all dated the 19th February, 1963, purported to be under Section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, by the second respondent-Income-tax Officer in respect of the assessment years 1958-59 to 1961-62 requiring the petitioner to file his returns for the said years as his income therefor had escaped assessment. A further notice under Section 148 dated the 7th March, 1963, in respect of the assessment year 1957-58 was issued by the said respondent-Income-tax Officer, after obtaining the necessary satisfaction of the Commissioner and served on Mahabir Prosad Po...
British Paints (India) Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-03-1970
Reported in: AIR1971Cal393
S.K. Chakravarti, J. 1. This appeal is at the instance of the plaintiff in a suit for damages for breach of contract against the Union of India. The Union of India invited tenders for the supply of paints of the description compound recolouring Olive Green Scamic 314 for faded tents to Specification Ind/ 32/7037. The plaintiff offered a tender being sample No. 30/100. The laboratory did not consider the sample to be upto the mark, but the higher authorities of the Defence Department accepted this tender, and placed an order with the plaintiff for supply of 500 Cwt. of this article and the price was fixed at Rs. 256/-F.O.R. Calcutta per Cwt. According to the contract the goods were to be inspected by the Inspector at Calcutta, and if he was satisfied that these were upto the mark, then the same could be despatched by the plaintiff on receipt of the inspection notes. The original date of delivery was fixed on 15th of October, 1952, but the plaintiff stated that it might not be in a posit...
Probodh Ch. Seth Vs. Income-tax Officer, C-ward and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-02-1970
Reported in: [1972]84ITR538(Cal)
K.L. Roy, J. 1. This application under Article 226 of the Constitution raises a short but an interesting question as to the interpretation of Section 297(2)(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, For the assessment year 1961-62 the petitioner filed his return voluntarily on the 1st December, 1961, before the respondent-Income-tax Officer, Howrah, On the 1st February, 1963, a notice under Section 23(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1922, was issued and served on the petitioner by the said Income-tax Officer. On 17th March, 1966, a further notice under Section 23(2) of the aforesaid Act was issued calling upon the petitioner to attend on the 22nd March, 1966, at the Income-tax Officer's office for completion of the assessment. Or the 23rd March, 1966, the petitioner informed the Income-tax Officer that as the aforesaid notice was served on him after 1 p.m. on the 22nd it was not possible for him to comply therewith. Thereafter, on the 31st December, 1966, a notice under Section 221 of the Income-tax A...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›