Kolkata Court April 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.
Sutlej Cotton Mills Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax Overruled
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-29-1970
Reported in: [1971]81ITR641(Cal)
P.B. Mukharji, Actg. C.J.1. In this statement of the case on the income-tax reference under Section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, the following questions have been raised :' 1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee's claim for the exchange loss of Rs. 11 lakhs for the assessment year 1957-58 and Rs. 5,50,000 for the assessment year 1959-60 in respect of remittances of profit from Pakistan was not allowable as a deduction ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that law charges amounting to Rs. 1,170 and Rs. 3,573 incurred in respect of business profits tax appeals for the assessment years 1957-58 and 1959-60 were not allowable as deductions ? 3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that law charges of Rs. 2,551 incurred for effecting changes in the existing managing agency agreement were not allowable as a deduction for the a...
Bharat Agencies Ltd. Vs. Income-tax Officer, C-ward and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-24-1970
Reported in: [1971]80ITR637(Cal)
K.L. Roy, J.1. This application under Article 226 of the Constitution raises a short but an important question of interpretation of the relevant provisions of the Income-tax Act which is not entirely free from doubt, The petitioner is the Bharat Agencies Ltd., a company incorporated under the Indian Companies Act, which was assessed to income-tax for the assessment years 1960-61 and 1961-62 by the respondent No, 1 on dates which are not apparent either from the orders themselves or from the petition. By notices dated the 22nd March, 1962, and 24th March, 1963, respectively, the respondent No. 1 intimated to the petitioner his intention of applying the provisions of Section 23A of the Income-tax Act, 1922 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), in respect, inter alia, of the aforesaid two assessment years as the company had not declared 100% of its distributable surplus in terms of the aforesaid section within 12 months from the end of the respective previous years. Two orders, both dat...
Keshtra Mohan Roy Vs. Income-tax Officer, a Ward and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-17-1970
Reported in: [1971]81ITR15(Cal)
K.L. Roy, J. 1. This is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution challenging the validity of a notice issued under Section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for reassessment of the income of the petitioner for the assessment year 1952-53. This rule was issued by this court on the 3rd April, 1969, directing the respondents, the Income-tax Officer, 'A' Ward, District IV(I), Calcutta, the Commissioner of Income-tax, West Bengal III, and the Union of India, to show cause why writs in the nature of mandamus, certiorari and prohibition should not issue cancelling and/or quashing the aforesaid notice and commanding the respondents to forbear from giving any effect thereto. 2. For the assessment year 1952-53, the petitioner, Sri Keshtra Mohan Roy, was assessed in the status of an individual by Sri P. C. Guha, the Income-tax Officer, District IV(I), Calcutta, on the 16th September, 1956. The relevant accounting year of the petitioner ended on the 31st October, 1951. In the assessment...
State Bank of India and anr. Vs. Jyoti Ranjan Mazumdar and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-16-1970
Reported in: AIR1970Cal503
A.C. Gupta, J.1. This appeal is from a judgment and decree passed by a learned Judge of the City Civil Court at Calcutta in a suit instituted by the respondent No. 1 before me as plaintiff.2. The material facts are not disputed. A sum of Rs. 26,790/- was due from the Government of West Bengal to the plaintiff who describes himself as a 'supplier' to the Government. To satisfy this claim the Principal Agricultural Officer, 24-Parganas (North), Barasat, on February 20, 1966 purchased a demand draft for the amount payable to the plaintiff in his trade name from the State Bank o India, Barasat Branch, drawn on the State Bank of India, Head Office, at 1, Strand Road, Calcutta. This draft bearing No. T 824720 was made over to the plaintiff from whose custody it was subsequently lost. The plaintiff immediately reported the loss to all concerned including State Bank of India, Barasat Branch, and State Bank of India, Head Office, who are respectively defendants Nos. 1 and 2 in the suit, and ask...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Srimati Minabati Agarwalla
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-16-1970
Reported in: [1971]79ITR278(Cal)
Arun K. Mukherjea, J.1. This reference under Section 66(1) of the Income-tax Act arises in connection with the assessment years 1953-54 to 1956-57. The short facts of the case on which the present reference arises are as follows:On 9th August, 1961, Shrimati Minabati Agarwalla, who is the assessee concerned, filed returns of income suo motu for the assessment years 1953-54 to 1961-62 before the Income-tax Officer, 'D' Ward, Howrah. The assessee filed a declaration along with these returns in which she tried to explain the source of her income during all these years. We are not concerned with that explanation in this reference. On the very day these returns were filed, the Income-tax Officer issued notices under Section 23(2) fixing the date ftf hearing on 16th August, 1961. The assessments for the years 1953-54 to 1960-61 were completed on 16th August, 1961, and the assessment for the assessment year 1961-62 was completed on 19th August, 1961. While making the assessments the Income-ta...
Fort Gloster Industries Ltd. Vs. Member, Board of Revenue
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-07-1970
Reported in: [1970]26STC141(Cal)
P.B. Mukharji, Actg. C.J.1. This is a complex and interesting case of reference to the High Court under Section 21(1) of the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941. The following question is set out in the statement of case for a decision by this court :-Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case proceeds of the sales made through the canteen run by the petitioner for the benefit of its employees should form any part of the petitioner's turnover?2. The facts lie within a small compass. The name of the dealer is Fort Gloster Industries Limited of 21 Strand Road, Calcutta. It is a registered dealer under the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act. The company has to run under statutory obligation a canteen for the benefit of its workers under Section 46 of the Factories Act, 1948. The dealer included in its gross turnover the sum of Rs. 46,258 as canteen sales for the assessment for the period ending 31st March, 1957. Out of this sum he claimed exemption for the sum of Rs. 15,426 under Sec...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›