Kolkata Court September 1972 Judgments
Scott and Saxby Ltd. Vs. the Commercial Tax Officer (Lyons Range Charg ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-29-1972
Reported in: [1973]32STC86(Cal)
Banerjee, J.1. This rule is directed against an order of assessment dated 15th December, 1967, under the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941. As a registered dealer, the petitioner is entitled to the benefits allowable under Section 5(2)(a)(ii) of the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941, and it is alleged that the petitioner is entitled to get exemption from payment of any tax on the petitioner's sales of tube-wells, pumps, accessories and parts thereof to all manufacturing dealers on production of declaration in form XXIV of the Bengal Sales Tax Rules, 1941. In respect of the assessment made on the petitioner for the 4 quarters ending 31st December, 1955, the Board of Revenue decided that the tube-wells and pumps are 'plant' and 'machinery' intended for use in the actual process of manufacture of paper and pulp and the petitioner's claim for exemption under Section 5(2)(a)(ii) was allowed. For the assessment for four quarters ending 31st December, 1963, the petitioner submitted retu...
Tag this Judgment!Sm. Susama Bala Sur Vs. Bibhuti Bhusan Mondal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-27-1972
Reported in: AIR1973Cal295,76CWN1091
S.C. Ghose, J.1. In this reference two questions have been referred to the Special Bench, to wit:--(1) What, in law, is the nature of a Notarial Bond (Grosses Copy) under the French Law in relation to the Indian Law and what is the mode of its enforcement? (2) What, if any, is the law of limitation, applicable to such enforcement, and what, if any, is the article of the Indian Limitation Act, applicable to such cases, after the introduction of that Act in the French territory of Chandernagore? 2. Originally the reference was heard by a Bench consisting of three learned Judges. As their Lordships could not come to an unanimous decision, their Lordships under Rule 6-A read with Rule 9 of Chapter VII of the Rules of the Appellate Side of this Court referred the matter to my Lord the Chief Justice for referring it to a larger Bench. Hence this matter has come before us.3. The case arises out of an objection petition filed under Section 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure whereby the Appellan...
Tag this Judgment!Goutam Goswami Vs. the District Magistarte and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-26-1972
Reported in: 1973CriLJ1010
Talukdar, J.1. This Rule was issued on an application under Section 491 Criminal Procedure Code, filed by the detenu, Goutam Goswami. praying for a writ and/or order and or direction in the nature of habeas corpus and is directed against the District Magistrate, Birbhum. the Superintendent, Dum Dum Central Jail: and the Secretary, Home (Special) Department. Writers' Building. Calcutta.2. The applicant before us has been detained under Section 3 (1) (a) (iii) of the Maintenance of Internal Security Act 1971 (Act 26 of 1971) subsequently corrected as being under Section 3 (1) (a) (ii) of the said Act, on a corrigendum served on the detenu. The order of detention being No. 469-C dated Suri the 20th January. 1972 was passed by Shri M. Gupta. District Magistrate, Birbhum and by a further order No, 470-C dated Suri the 20th January. 1972 passed by the same learned Magistrate the detenu was directed to be detained in the Suri Jail. The detenu was arrested on 1-3-1972 and the grounds of detent...
Tag this Judgment!Chittaranjan Roy Vs. Damodar Valley Corporation and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-25-1972
Reported in: (1973)ILLJ563Cal
Salil Kumar Datta, J.1. The petitioner is a member of Class I staff of the Damodar Valley Corporation, at the material time being an Executive Engineer in the office of the General Superintendent, Transmission, Maithon. The petitioner was originally appointed as a direct 'recruit' on May 10, 1954, and thereafter, he was appointed in the permanent post of assistant engineer, electrical, with effect from March 1, 1960. This will also appear from paragraph 6 of the affidavit-in-opposition as also the annexure 'G' (letter of the corporation dated the 16th August, 1966). At the time the petitioner joined his service his date of birth was recorded on the basis of a birth certificate issued by the Rajpur Municipality as November 4, 1915. This date of birth was also accepted and recorded in the gradation lists subsequently published by the corporation from time to time.2. It appears that the petitioner on the requisition of the corporation forwarded to it his matriculation certificate which sh...
Tag this Judgment!Sarvamangala Properties Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-21-1972
Reported in: [1973]90ITR267(Cal)
Sabyasachi Mukharji, J. 1. By this reference under Section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, the following question has been referred to this court:' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in holding that the assessee-firm was the owner of premises No. 5, Clive Row, Calcutta, and that the provisions of Section 9(3) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, had no application in this case ?'2. The assessment years concerned in this reference are 1958-59, 1959-60 and 1960-61 and the corresponding accounting years being the financial years 1957-58, 1958-59 and 1959-60. The assessee is a registered firm consisting of two partners, Sri Cbhaganlal Burman and Sri Baijnath Paras-rampuria, with equal shares. The firm was constituted under a deed of partnership dated 6th December, 1956, the partnership having been deemed to have come into existence on and from I9th September, 1958. It is provided in the partnership deed that the partners would carr...
Tag this Judgment!Hiralal Deb Gupta Vs. Salil Kumar Paul and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-20-1972
Reported in: AIR1973Cal320,77CWN374
A.N. Sen, J. 1. These are two appeals by the defendant in a suit filed under Order 37 of the Code of Civil Procedure. 2. Salil Kumar Paul, the first respondent in the appeals instituted a suit under the provisions of Order 37 of the Code of Civil Procedure against Hiralal Deb Gupta who happens to be the appellant before us and one Ajit Kumar Ganguli. The document on which the plaintiff Salil Kumar Paul instituted the suit under the provisions of Order 37 of the Code of Civil Procedure reads as follows: 'Rs. 50,000/- dated 24-7-68 Rs. 10/-90 (Ninety) days after date without grace please pay to Sri Salil Kumar Paul of 26, Beadon Row, Calcutta 6 or order at Calcutta or 24 Parganas or Howrah or Hooghly the sum of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand) only, with interest @ 8% per annum in case of default of payment on the due date at 22-10-1968 for value received in cash presentation for payment and notice of dishonour waived. 100 X 500 = Rs. 50,000/-Received Rupees fifty thousand In cash.Sd...
Tag this Judgment!Chameli Bibi Vs. Kanhaiyalal Agarwalla and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-19-1972
Reported in: AIR1973Cal328
ORDERRamendra Mohan Datta, J. 1. The petitioner Prem Kumar Agarwal is one of the daughters of one Jiwandas Agarwal, since deceased. Jiwandas Agarwal was one of the two trustees in respect of the trust created by one Babulal Agarwalla, deceased, by his will dated August 6, 1873 whereby he created a trust for various religious and charitable purposes including the construction of a temple at Vrindaban and a Dharamshala at Calcutta, Jiwandas, one of the joint trustees died a few months back. Since then disputes and differences arose by and between the heirs of Jiwandas, being his three daughters. The eldest son-in-law of Jiwandas by the name of Dhanpaldas Gupta, at all material time, had been and still is the other trustee in respect of the said trust for religious and charitable purposes. 1a. After the death of the said Jiwandas Agarwal, the said Dhanpaldas Gupta as the surviving trustee applied to this Court for appointment of another trustee in the place and stead of Jiwandas Agarwal, ...
Tag this Judgment!T.i. and M. Sales Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-15-1972
Reported in: [1985]151ITR286(Cal)
Sankar Prasad Mitra, C.J. 1. This reference under Section 256(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961, arises out of 56 applications regarding assessments of T.I. & M. Sales Ltd., hereinafter called the 'Indian company', treating it as an agent of a number of non-resident companies. Here we are concerned witheight companies, six of them have been described as 'Group A' companies, and two as 'Group B' companies. The Indian company had no direct agreement with the Group 'A' companies but had dealings with them by virtue of an agreement with T.I. Export Ltd., hereinafter referred to as the 'Export Company'.2. The Group 'B' companies are those with whom the Indian company had direct agreements. When the Tribunal heard the appeal, there were three Group B companies. We now have before us only two of them. The third company, viz., M/s. Geo Tucker Eyelet Co. Ltd., has been found by the Tribunal to be non-taxable in India and the Tribunal's decision is accepted by the Department. The Tribunal has also dealt ...
Tag this Judgment!Kalidas Chowdhury Vs. Wealth-tax Officer, g Ward and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-12-1972
Reported in: 77CWN61,[1973]91ITR388(Cal)
Banerjee, J.1. This rule is directed against the notice under Section 17 of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, by which the petitioner was asked to file a return as the Wealth-tax Officer has reason to believe that net wealth chargeable to tax for the assessment years 1963-64 to 1966-67 has escaped assessment within the meaning of Section 17 of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957. The factsleading to the case are that the petitioner is the owner of softie properties including 12/1, Nather Bagan Street, Calcutta-5, and 2, Sovabazar Street, Calcutta. By a deed of trust executed in writing on 6th April, 1957, and registered, the petitioner settled the properties in favour of the trustees, Sri Ajit Kumar Chowdhury and Arun Kumar Chowdhury. Under the said trust deed the wife and sons of the petitioner were the beneficiaries in respect of the income out of the trust properties. The petitioner paid gift-tax to the extent of Rs. 17,019.20 as per notice of demand, dated 19th September, 1959. After the settlement w...
Tag this Judgment!Muktipada Mondal Vs. Abdul Jabbar and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-07-1972
Reported in: 1973CriLJ1246
ORDERSudhamoy Basu, J.1. This is a Reference under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure made by the Sessions Judge. Birbhum. The letter of reference recommends that an order dated the 5th May. 1971 passed by Sri R. N. Saha Magistrate, Second Class. Ram-purhat. in G. R. Case No. 147 of 1968 be set aside and that the learned Magistrate be directed to take necessary-steps for enforcing the attendance of prosecution witnesses who accepted summons and then to dispose of the case according to law.2. In the case under reference which involves a charge under Sections 325/379 of the Indian Penal Code, the trial seems to have been a protracted one. Although the charge was framed by the learned Magistrate on 28-1-69 it was adjourned from time to time. On the 3rd October. 1969. four witnesses were present, but the learned Magistrate was busy and the case was again adjourned to 19-1-70. On the said date also the case was adjourned to -31-3-70 when two witnesses were examined and the case w...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »