Kolkata Court May 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.
Calcutta State Transport Corporation Vs. First Industrial Tribunal, We ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-29-1970
Reported in: AIR1971Cal206
ORDERPradyot Kumar Banerjee, J.1. In this Rule the petitioner Calcutta State Transport Corporation challenges an order passed by the First Industrial Tribunal, West Bengal on 28th of June 1964. The respondent No. 3 claimed profit sharing bonus from the petitioner. The respondent No. 2 referred the matter to the First Industrial Tribunal, West Bengal, for adjudication issue being Bonus for the year 1960-61. At the hearing the petitioner raised a preliminary objection to the extent that the Corporation is a statutory Corporation; the fund of the Corporation can only be spent under the provisions of the Act, Section 30 of the Road Transport Corporations Act does not permit payment of any amount as bonus and as such the reference is without jurisdiction. The preliminary point was decided against the petitioner and the petitioner moved this Court and obtained the present Rule-The short point for consideration in this case is whether in view of Section 30 of the Road Transport Corporations A...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Indian Chamber of Commerce
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-29-1970
Reported in: [1971]81ITR147(Cal)
P.B. Mukharji, C.J. 1. In this income-tax reference under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the following question of law has been raised for an answer by this court:'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, theTribunal was right in holding that the activities carried on by the assesseefrom which it derived, (a) arbitration fees, (b) fees for certificate of origin,and (c) its share of profit from Messrs. Calcutta Licensed Measurers, werenot activities carried on for profit within the meaning of Section 2(15) of theIncome-tax Act, 1961, and, accordingly, the income derived from suchactivities was exempt from tax under Section 11 of the Income-taxAct, 1961 ?'2. The facts raising this controversy are as follows:The assessee is the Indian Chamber of Commerce. The assessment year is 1964-65 and the corresponding accounting year is the year 1963. The assessee-company was registered under Section 26 of the Indian Companies Act, 1913, and was permitted to omit the ...
Rameshwarlal Harlalka Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-28-1970
Reported in: AIR1970Cal520
ORDERD. Basu, J. 1. The petitioner in this case, who is a trader in edibles such as spices, has challenged the validity of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 on the ground, inter alia, that the Act contravenes the provisions of Articles 14, 19(1)(f) and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India and asks for a declaration of such invalidity of the Act and the rules made thereunder and also for an appropriate writ to restrain the respondents from enforcing the Act and the rules against the petitioner. The petition was filed on the 4th June 1964 and was subsequently amended to add paragraphs 11(a) and 11(b), which seek to explain the cause or action to support the petition. 2. The grounds of the alleged invalidity of the said Act are eventually confined to two only inasmuch as the ground under Article 19(1)(f) has not been pressed. Before I enter into the merits of the said allegations as to unconstitutionality, the preliminary objections in Bar raised by Mr. Nani Kumar Chakraborty...
Deben Adhicary Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-26-1970
Reported in: AIR1972Cal84
ORDERK.L. Roy, J.1. Much of the sting has been taken away from this Contempt proceeding by the passage of time. The petitioner and his wife are the sole share-holders and Directors of Metro Engineering Works Private Limited which has its office and factory at No. 38 Kansaripara Road within the Bhowanipore Police Station. It is alleged that in June 1967, the workers of the aforesaid Company 'gheraoed' the supervising staff on several occasions and also staged a 'gherao' at the residence of the petitioner, and in spite of repeated requests, the Police authorities failed to take any action in regard thereto. On the 19th July, 1967, in an application under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner obtained from this Court a Rule, viz., C. R. 1285 (W)/67 calling upon the State of West Bengal some officials of the State, the Commissioner of Police and the Officer-in-charge Bhowanipore Police Station being respondents Nos. 1 to 6 and 17workers being respondents Nos. 7 to 24 and the Metr...
Gouri Shankar Awasthi Vs. Income-tax Officer, b Ward and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-21-1970
Reported in: [1970]78ITR784(Cal)
Sankar Prasad Mitra, J. 1. Sub-section (6) of Section 220 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, reads as follows :'Where an assessee has presented an appeal under Section 246 the Income-tax Officer may, in his discretion, and subject to such conditions as he may think fit to impose in the circumstances of the case, treat the assessee as not being in default in respect of the amount In dispute in the appeal, even though the time for payment has expired, as long as such appeal remains undisposed of.'2. In the instant case, there was an order of assessment .against the petitioner in respect of the assessment year 1963-64. The petitioner preferred an appeal to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. On the 22nd April, 1968, the petitioner wrote 16 the Income-tax Officer who made the assessment requesting postponement of payment of the tax assessed pending the disposal of the appeal to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. In this letter two grounds in support of the prayer to keep the matter of payme...
Raibahadur Chowdhury Vs. Income-tax Officer, b Ward and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-20-1970
Reported in: [1971]79ITR274(Cal)
Sankar Prasad Mitra, J.1. In this application under Article 226 of the Constitution the petitioner has questioned the validity of a notice dated 24th March, 1965, issued by the respondent No. 1 under Section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 1948-49. The original assessment order under Section 23(3) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, was passed on the 16th January, 1952. The petitioner's case was that, during the assessment year 1948-49, it had obtained loans from five several persons aggregating Rs. 85,000. In 1957, the original assessment of the 16th January, 1952, was reopened by a notice under Section 34(1)(a) of the Act of 1922. The petitioner was called upon to prove the genuineness of these loans. Affidavits affirmed by the said five persons were filed before the Income-tax Officer stating that they had made advances to the partnership firm, namely, the petitioner, but the Income-tax Officer in his fresh assessment order under Section 23(3)/34 added the l...
Chitpore Golabari Co. P. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax West Beng ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-20-1970
Reported in: [1971]82ITR753(Cal)
Income-tax Reference No. 102 of 1967.P. B. MUKHARJI, ACTG. C.J. - These are three income-tax references which at counsels request we have heard one after the other because they arise between the same parties and because there are certain connected questions of fact and law, and because they arise out of the some order of the tribunal although three different references have been made.We shall take up first Income-tax Reference No. 102 of 1967, in the matter of Commissioner of Income-tax v. Chitpore Golabari Co. Private Ltd. The question set for an answer by this court in this reference is as follows :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, on a proper construction of the indenture of lease dated 28th Octoner, 1957, the Tribunal was right in holding that the entire rental income from premises No. 8, Clive Row, Calcutta, should be assessed under section 12 of the Income-tax Act, 1922 ?'The facts of the case giving rise to this question are as follows :The assessment ...
Aminchand Payarilal Vs. Income-tax Officer and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-15-1970
Reported in: [1973]87ITR305(Cal)
K.L. Roy, J. 1. This is an application under, Article 226 of the Constitution for the issue of appropriate writs for cancelling and/or quashing certain alleged decisions said to be contained in two letters dated the 27th/28th November, 1967, and the 20th November, 1967, by the respondent-Income-tax Officer, and prohibiting the said respondent from proceeding to make any assessment on the petitioner for the years 1959-60 to 1964-65, and this rule was obtained on the 4th January, 1968.2. The facts are shortly these :The petitioner is the well-known partnership firm of Aminchand Payarilal whose partners are Shree Satya Pal, Shree Jit Pal, Shree Swaraj Pal and Shree Surrendra Pal. The petitioner filed a disclosure petition before the Central Board of Direct Taxes on the 19th September, 1958, and in the course of the said disclosure proceedings the petitioner agreed that the income of the firm and its partners for the assessment years 1951-52 to 1958-59 may be taken at Rs. 1 crore which was...
India Foils Ltd. Vs. Income-tax Officer and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-15-1970
Reported in: [1973]87ITR333(Cal)
K.L. Roy, J.1. Venesta Foils Ltd., a company incorporated in the U. K., manufactures and markets aluminium foils and allied products extensively in the U. K. and in other countries throughout the world. On the 17th March, 1939, another company called the Foil Centre Ltd. was incorporated under the English Companies Act with an authorised capital of 100 divided into 100 shares of 1 each of which only two shares were issued as fully paid-up and held by Venesta Foils Lfd. On the 20th April, 1961, at an extraordinary general meeting of Foil Centre, resolutions were passed changing the name of that company to India Foils Ltd. and also increasing the authorised capital by a further sum of 900 devided into 900 shares of 1 each. By an agreement dated the 30th November, 1961, Venesta agreed to transfer all its immovable properties, factories, plants, machinery and other movable and immovable assets in India to the petitioner, India Foils Ltd., the present petitioner, at the value shown in the b...
Chhaganmal Agarwalla Vs. Income-tax Officer, a Ward and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-14-1970
Reported in: [1972]86ITR248(Cal)
Sankar Prasad Mitra, J. 1. On March 14, 1962, the Income-tax Officer, 'E' Ward, Dist. IV(3), made an order of assessment under Section 23(3) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 (hereinafter referred to as 'the old Act'), for the assessment year 1961-62 against the petitioner. On March 31, 1966, an order of assessment was passed against the petitioner's partnership firm, Jaswantrai & Bros., for the assessment year 1961-62. The respondent No. 1, namely, the Income-tax Officer, 'A.' Ward, Dist. III(3), Calcutta, gave to the petitioner on the 6th May, 1966, a notice under Section 154/155 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the new Act'), for the assessment year 1961-62. The purpose of this notice was to rectify the petitioner's assessment made on the 14th March, 1962, upon the assessment of the petitioner's firm on the 31st March, 1966. Needless to say that, by this rectification, the petitioner's tax liability was sought to be increased. On the 12th May, 1966, the resp...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »