Kolkata Court April 1971 Judgments
Union Carbide (India) Ltd. Vs. Income-tax Officer and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-30-1971
Reported in: [1973]87ITR529(Cal)
Sabyasachi Mukharji, J. 1. In this application under Article 226 of the Constitution the petitioner challenges notices under Section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, issued in respect of assessment years 1958-59, 1959-60 and 1962-63. The said notices were issued on the ground that the petitioner-company had enjoyed benefits under Section 15C of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, which the petitioner was not entitled to in the relevant assessment years. It would be necessary to advert to the facts in detail later on. For the assessment year 1962-63 it has been stated by the petitioner that no relief under Section 15C had been claimed or granted. Therefore, there cannot be any question of reopening of the assessment for the said assessment year on the aforesaid ground. The fact that in respect of the assessment year 1962-63 no relief under Section 15C had been granted has been accepted by the learned counsel for the revenue. Learned counsel has further stated that the revenue did not wish ...
Tag this Judgment!Hari Sankar Banerjee Vs. Corporation of Calcutta
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-30-1971
Reported in: 1973CriLJ1264
K.K. Mitra, J.1. This is an appeal against the order passed by a Presidency Magistrate convicting the appellant under Sections 16(1)(a)(i)/7(1) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act of 1954.2. The prosecution case is that on June 3. 1968 the Food Inspector of the Corporation of Calcutta visited a shop in the name and style of 'Bengal Trading Corporation situated at 6-A' Nabin Sirkar Lane, The appellant who is the sole proprietor of the concern was present. There was also a seller present at the shop. The Inspector purchased three closed bottles containing food having inscription on the bottle as 'Betraco Milk Food/Betraco Baby Food (Cow's dried milk for babies and infants)' as sample for analysis being suspicious about the purity of the food product. He gave notice in writing to the seller Barun Kumar Basu. He sent one of the bottles to the Public. Analyst for analysis and report. He handed over one bottle to the seller Barun Kumar Basu and he kept the third bottle with him for fu...
Tag this Judgment!B.K. Guha, I.C.S. (Retd.) Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-27-1971
Reported in: [1972]84ITR592(Cal)
Sankar Prasad Mitra, J. 1. In 1941 the assessee's wife entered into a contract with the Hindusthan Co-operative Insurance Society for purchase of a plot of land in New Alipore. She made a deposit of Rs. 2,000 in part payment of the price of the land which was obtained by raising a loan against the assessee's insurance policy. Before the land could be purchased, however, the Government requisitioned it. In or about June, 1950, the land was de-requisitioned. Thereafter, it was sold and a sum of Rs. 20,081 came to the assessee's wife's share.2. With Rs. 20,000 out of the aforesaid amount and with loan taken from insurance companies against the assessee's insurance policies and with a further small sum given by the assessee, a plot of land on Gariahat Road was purchased on November 28, 1950, from the Government of West Bengal for the sum of Rs. 29,292.3. A building was constructed on the land at a cost of approximately Rs. 57,500. This construction was financed by the assessee by withdrawa...
Tag this Judgment!Dhirendra Nath Bose Vs. Additional Member, Board of Revenue
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-27-1971
Reported in: [1971]28STC19(Cal)
P.K. Banerjee, J. 1. In this application the petitioner challenges the order made under Section 21(1) of the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941, requiring the Board of Revenue to refer the question of law to the High Court. The Board of Revenue refused to refer the same to the High Court. It is argued that the order was passed without giving the petitioner an opportunity of being heard.2. The only question, therefore, that arises in this case is whether in disposing of the matter under Section 21(1) of the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, the Member, Board of Revenue, is to hear the parties. We are, therefore, concerned whether under Section 21(1) the Board acts as a quasi-judicial body and must dispose of the application under Section 21(1) after hearing the parties. There cannot be any dispute that in disposing the matter coming under Section 20 of the Act, the Board must hear persons adversely affected by the order. If any party is affected by the order passed by the Board they hav...
Tag this Judgment!Ajay Mukherji Vs. the State and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-27-1971
Reported in: 1971CriLJ1329
ORDERN.C. Talukdar, J.1. This Rule is at the instance of Sri Ajay Kumar Mukherji, now the Chief Minister of West Bengal, against an order dated the 12th December, 1970 passed by Sri S.C. Talukdar, Chief Presidency Magistrate, Calcutta in case No. C/960 of 1970 issuing summons for the production of the accounts and the minutes of the Bangla Congress for 1969 and for appearance to give evidence as a witness for the defence on 28-12-1970 and also another order dated the 9th January, 1971 passed by Sri H. S. Barari, Acting Chief Presidency Magistrate, Calcutta in the same proceedings directing the petitioner to produce the accounts, receipts and vouchers and minute books as referred to therein while deferring the consideration of his examination as a defence witness after the 15th March, 1971.2. The facts leading on to the Rule can be put in a short compass. A petition of complaint was filed in the court of the Chief Presidency Magistrate, Calcutta by the complainant opposite-party No. 2, ...
Tag this Judgment!The State Vs. Sova Rani Debi
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-27-1971
Reported in: 1973CriLJ784
ORDERP.C. Borooah, J.1. This is a reference under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure by Sri R.B. Saha, Sessions Judge, Howrah, recommending that an order dated the 5th of January of 1970, passed by Sri Section K. Banerjee, Magistrate, 1st Class, Howrah, ordering the return of some rice seized in connection with a case under Section 7(1) of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, to Sm. Sthovaranl Devi, wife of the deceased accused K.C. Chakrabarty of the said case, and a further order dated 5th of May, 1970 rejecting the prayer of the State for reconsideration of the order dated the 5th January, 1970 should be Set aside.2. The late K.C. Chakrabarty, the husband of Sm. Shovarani Devi, a Railway Guard, was being prosecuted for carrying 61 bags and 12 baskets of rice weighing about 4760 kgs. in the brake-van of the Titagarh-Howrah passenger. The rice was alleged to be smuggled. The said K.C. Chakrabarty died on 24.2.69 and Sri S.M. De. the trying Magistrate dropped the case agains...
Tag this Judgment!Sisir Kumar Ghose Vs. University of North Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-26-1971
Reported in: AIR1971Cal402
B.C. Mitra, J. 1. This is an application for a certificate under Article 133(1)(a), (b) and (c) of the Constitution. The petitioner had retired from the services of the State of West Bengal on May 2, 1965, and thereafter on July 16, 1965 was re-employed by the State Government as the Accounts Officer of the Bengal Engineering College. While holding this office of Accounts Officer, he applied for the post of Finance Officer in the University of North Bengal (hereinafter referred to as the University). He was selected by the selection committee for the post of Finance Officer, and was appointed to that post on a purely temporary basis at a salary of Rs. 1,000/- per month, the scale being Rs. 1000-50-1500/-. On September 5, 1966, the University approved of the selection of the petitioner. On the date of appointment, the petitioner's age was69 years 4 months and 3 days. On July 10, 1967, the Vice-Chancellor of the University requested the Chancellor for extension of the service of the peti...
Tag this Judgment!Harbans Lal Malhotra and Sons Private Ltd. Vs. Income-tax Officer, c W ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-23-1971
Reported in: [1972]83ITR848(Cal)
Sabyasachi Mukharji, J.1. This is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution challenging the rectification proceedings under Section 154 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. For the assessment year 1963-64, the petitioner filed its return of income along with and supported by its audited profit and loss account, balance-sheet, depreciation statement and various other statements. The petitioner is a company and carries on business of manufacture and sale of safety razor blades, steel files, bandsaws, small tools and other articles. The petitioner alleges that during the course of the said assessment proceedings for the said assessment year before the Income-tax Officer the petitioner produced and/or caused to be produced various books of accounts, papers and other documents and had given various explanations, information and evidence that was necessary and/or required by the Income-tax Officer. The petitioner contends that the petitioner disclosed all primary facts and material facts ...
Tag this Judgment!Bose Manna and Co. Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Additional Land Acquisition Officer, ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-21-1971
Reported in: AIR1971Cal424
ORDERA.K. Sinha, J.1. This is a Rule obtained by the petitioner for quashing an Award given by the Collector for acquisition of petitioner's land under Land Acquisition Act 1 of 1894 (referred to herein as the Act). The petitioner purchased certain lands including a tank measuring 2.12 acres at Ichhapore, Howrah and set up a factory there. At the instance of the Howrah Improvement Trust there was a proceeding for acquisition of the petitioner's land contained in C. S. Plots 1296, part of 1297 and 1298 for future improvement scheme of that locality in Howrah. On these plots 1296 contains a tank. The petitioner filed claims in respect of all these plots and tank and award was given in respect of 1297 (part) and 1298 on March 26, 1966. Possession of these plots was taken on 30th March. 1966 by the Collector,2. Thereafter, It is said from a notice of 22nd August, 1966, under Section 12(2) of the Act that another award in respect of plot No. 1296 that is a tank, was made on August 19, 1966....
Tag this Judgment!Haji Mahabub HossaIn and ors. Vs. Biswanath Nandy and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-20-1971
Reported in: AIR1971Cal381,75CWN597
R.N. Dutt, J.1. These two Rules are taken up together as the same question is involved in both the cases. One Touhid Ahmed Khan, Mutwali of Khan Saheb Abdul Ajij Khan Wakf Estate, was the owner of Hot No. 815 of mouza Bagbari with an area of 18.75 acres. On January 24, 1969, he sold 3.25 acres out of the plot on its south to Biswanath Nandy. Then on August 21, 1970, the petitioners in both the cases took lease of 11.32 acres out of the plot on the southern side and again on August 25, 1970, took lease of the other 4.18 acres of the plot from the said Touhid Ahmed Khan. Subsequently, Biswanath Nandy, who is opposite party No. 1 in both thesecases, filed two applications under Section 8 of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1956, before a Revenue Officer for pre-emption of these transfers in favour of the petitioners -- pre-emption cases Nos. 92/70 and 97/70. Opposite party No. 1 further prayed for an order of ad interim injunction restraining the petitioners from manufacturing bricks, co...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »