Kolkata Court March 1973 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.
Katihar Match Works (1954) (P.) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-08-1973
Reported in: [1975]99ITR251(Cal)
A.N. Sen, J. 1. In this reference under Section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, the following question of law has been referred to this court:'Whether the Income-tax Officer's order dated March 30, 1963, dropping the proceedings started under Section 22(2) could be the subject of an appeal under Section 30 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 ?'2. The facts of the case have been fully set out in the statement of the case and the same may briefly be indicated. The reference relates to the assessment year 1959-60. The assessee is a company carrying on business in manufacture and sale of matches. It was served with a notice under Section 22(2) dated September 9, 1959, on September 17, 1959. The assessee did not submit any return within the time allowed under the notice but the assessee submitted a return on 25th August, 1961, disclosing a loss of Rs. 97,660. The Income-tax Officer, by his order dated 30th March, 1963, held that the assessee's claim to get the loss determined was b...
Ramlal Kanhaiyalal Somani a Partnership Firm Vs. Ajit Kumar Chatterjee ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-07-1973
Reported in: AIR1973Cal372
A.K. Sinha, J.1. This appeal is preferred by the plaintiff-appellant against a judgment and decree dismissing its suit for recovery of damages against State of West Bengal and some of its Officer, briefly in the circumstances as follows:2. The plaintiff which is a firm registered under the Indian Partnership Act consisting of Bhimraj Somani, Hardwari Mal Somani, Om Prakash Somani, all partners and one Satya Narayan Somani, a minor admitted to the benefits of the partnership firm--all sons of the Kanhaiyalal Somani since deceased was carrying on business in Cooch Behar On 27th April, 1957, the defendant-respondent No. 1 -- a Police Officer -- with a number of Police Constables wrongfully and forcibly entered into the business premises of the appellant and obtained possession of several godowns and locked and scaled up the entire premises including various books, papers and goods worth Rs. 27,5000-0-0 under a purported order of attachment dated 26-4-1957 issued against Bhimraj Somani, on...
Biswanath Banerjee and ors. Vs. Balai Lal Mukhopadhaya and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-07-1973
Reported in: AIR1973Cal345
A.K. Sinha, J. 1. This appeal is preferred by the plaintiffs-appellants against judgment and decree of the trial Court in a suit for partition briefly in the circumstances as follows: One Saraswati Devi, since deceased, a daughter of one Joy Kishan Mukherjee of Uttarpara, it is alleged, got absolutely under his Will a dwelling house with connected lands and tanks amongst other properties at Uttarpara which devolved after her death upon her three sons Gnanendra Nath Banerjee. Amarendra Nath Baneriee and Sachindra Nath Banerjee in equal share, who during their lifetime were in possession thereof as the members of the Dayabhaga Hindu Joint family. Of these three brothers Gnanendra died first in or about 1314 B. S. leaving his only son Parbati as his heir. A bus service business started by Amarendra Nath along with Sachindra as joint family business though proved to be a profitable concern at the early stage 'became ultimately a losing concern resulting in involvement of debts. In order to...
Ramnath Das and ors. Vs. Saha Chowdhury and Co. Ltd. and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-06-1973
Reported in: AIR1974Cal246
ORDERA.K. Sarkar, J.1. This is an application for execution of a decree for costs by and on behalf of the defendants Nos. 1, 2 and 3 against the defendant No. 6. The relevant portion of the said decree dated 1st May. 1959 passed by A.N. Ray, J. as his Lordship then was, appear from certified copy annexed to the Tabular Statement affirmed on May 2, 1972 as follows:--'And it is further ordered and decreed that the plaintiffs and the defendants Sailesh Chowdhury and Shyamapada Chowdhury do pay to the defendants Saha Chowdhury and Co. Private Ltd. Prodyot Kumar Chowdhury and Sm. Satadal Basini Chowdhury their costs of this suit including the reserved costs and costs of Commission (to be taxed by the Taxing Officer of this Court and in taxing such costs the said Taxing Officer do tax the costs of commission as of hearing including fees to two advocates) this Court doth certify that this is a fit case for engaging two advocates.'2. Mr. P.K. Roy, Counsel appearing in support of this applicati...
Sriram Pasrisha Vs. Jagannath Sen and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-05-1973
Reported in: AIR1974Cal80,(1973)77CALLT613(HC)
Salil Kumar Datta, J.1. This is an appeal by the defendants against a judgment of affirmance in a suit for recovery of possession on eviction of the defendants therefrom. The plaintiff's case is as follows: One Bhagat Ram Pasrisha was inducted as a monthly tenant in respect of the entire second floor of the premises No. 221/ 1, Rash Behari Avenue, P. S. Ballygunge at a monthly rent of Rs. 150/- according to the English calendar month since 1946, who thereafter promised to vacate the said premises within 31st March, 1947 by a written letter. The tenancy was renewed at the said rate of rent and the tenant undertook to vacate the suit premises positively after 31st March, 1948. After the expiry of the said period he neglected to vacate and died on 18-2-60 leaving behind him the defendants as his heirs and successors who inherited the monthly tenancy. It was stated that the defendants were habitual defaulters in payment of rent and the deposits which were purported to have been made with t...
Krishnadhan Chandra Vs. Kanailal Ghosh and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-05-1973
Reported in: AIR1973Cal422,77CWN450
Salil Kumar Datta, J.1. This is an appeal by the plaintiff against concurrent judgment of affirmance. The plaintiff instituted a suit on the following allegations. The suit land belonged to Nripendra Nath Ghose and Kanai Lal Mustafi from whom the plaintiff took settlement on July 10, 1948, on payment of a selami of Rs. 185/- at an annual rental of Rs. 36/-. Since that date he had been in possession by cultivation in khas or through bargadars. The plaintiff also got his name mutated in the records of the landlord and had been paying rent in respect of the suit lands while he was in possession of the suit land in that way. On July 1, 1956 the defendants challenged title of the plaintiff in the suit land and made futile attempts of obstruction in his possession of the suit land and also thereafter the defendant threatened the plaintiff with dispossession. It was stated that the defendant had never any title or possession of the suit land and as a cloud had been cast on the plaintiff's tit...
Sarju Prosad Sharma Vs. Income-tax Officer, d Ward and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-05-1973
Reported in: [1974]93ITR36(Cal)
Ghosh, J.1. The impugned notice in the instant case which is sought to be set aside by the issue of a writ in the nature of mandamus in the present proceedings is a summons under Section 131 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, calling upon Sri Sarju Prosad Sharma of 246-C, Vivekananda Road, Calcutta, under Section 131 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, to attend personally at the office of the Income-tax Officer, 'D' Ward, Dist. II(I), Calcutta, on February 25, 1972, at 12-30 p.m. to give evidence and to produce either personally or through an authorised representative the books of account and other documents specified on the reverse of the said summons. Pursuant to the said notice the said Sarju Prosad Sharma, the witness named in the said summons, duly attended. Trouble arose when the authorised representative of the assessee partnership firm sought to interpret the questions and answers which were put from English to Hindi and from Hindi to English, respectively. The case of the respondent, Inco...
Dalmiya Engineering Private Limited Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-02-1973
Reported in: AIR1975Cal77
T.K. Basu. J.1. The point involved in this appeal lies within a very short compass. The appeal is directed against a judgment and order of K. L. Roy. J. dated the 10th November, 1971 by which the learned trial Judge dismissed an application made by the appellant under Section 20 of the Arbitration Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act), containing the usual prayers for the filing of the arbitration agreement and appointment of arbitrator or arbitrators by this Court. In the original petition a prayer for the revocation of the authority of the respondent No. 2 to appoint an arbitrator under Section 5 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 was made. We are however not concerned with that prayer in this appeal.2. The contract out of which the present appeal arises was concluded between the appellant and the respondent No. 1 by the usual method of offer and acceptance of a tender with regard to the construction of certain buildings at Sin-ghee Park, Calcutta. Clause 25 of the Contract contains the...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›