Kolkata Court March 1974 Judgments
Ratan Kumar Poddar and ors. Vs. the Howrah Motor Co. Pvt. Ltd. and ors ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-29-1974
Reported in: AIR1975Cal180
B.C. Mitra, J.1. The first respondent Howrah Motor Co. Private Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the company) is a distributor in the eastern region of India of several well-known concerns manufacturing motor spare-parts and components. According to the company the first and the second appellants and the fourth, fifth, sixth, seventh and eighth respondents constituted a Hindu joint family governed by the Mitaksihara School of Hindu Law. The third respondent Prakash Trading Company is, according to the company, a joint family business and in May, 1969, this firm approached the company for facilities of buying motor-parts on credit on a running and continuous account. The company's case is that Champalal Poddar and Gyan Prakash Poddar the fourth and fifth respondents represented to the company that all the Poddar parties to this appeal constituted a Hindu joint family governed by the Mitakshara School of Hindu Law of which Champalal Poddar the fourth respondent was the Karta and that this...
Tag this Judgment!Lakshmi Narayan Dutta Vs. the State of West Bengal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-28-1974
Reported in: AIR1975Cal103
Sen Gupta, J.1. These six appeals arise out of the awards passed by the Land Acquisition Collector in three different Land Acquisition Cases, namely, 37/3, 37/4 and 37/5 all of the year 1950-51 of the Burdwan Collectprate and affirmed by the Additional District Judge.2. A short history may be given to show how these six appeals have arisen out of the award made in these three Land Acquisition cases:--The properties, acquired by the Government under those Land Acquisition cases, belonged to late Hari Bangsha Dutta. On his death, the same have been inherited by his two sons -- one Jit Narayan Dutta and another Lakshmi Narayan Dutta. Both of them are the appellants in the respective appeals to be presently mentioned.3. In Land Acquisition Case No. 37/4 of 1950-51 C. S. Plot Nos. 50, 51 and 53 of mouza Islabad are involved. On the objection filed by Lakshmi Narayan against the award the same was referred under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act of 1894 to the District Judge, Burdwan. I...
Tag this Judgment!Biswanath Mitra Vs. Sm. Anjali Mitra
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-22-1974
Reported in: AIR1975Cal45
Banerjee, J. 1. This appeal is at the instance of the husband who is a respondent in an application by the wife under Section 10(1)(b) of the Hindu Marriage Act for judicial separation. The case of the applicant wife is that on the 17th February, 1959. the petitioner-wife, respondent herein, went through a form of marriage with the respondent-appellant herein, in accordance with the Hindu rites and rituals at 'Suruchi Kutir', Jublee Part, Tollygunge, Calcutta. In or about the year 1955. the petitioner was introduced to the respondent by a common acquaintance and in course of four years following the said introduction, a mutual love and affection developed in between the petitioner and the respondent which ultimatly culminated in the aforesaid marriage of the petitioner with the respondent. Just after the marriage, the petitioner started living with the respondent at 4/A, Benode Saha Lane, Calcutta and resided there upto 15th August, 1961. On the 3rd August, 1960. a male child named Sud...
Tag this Judgment!Mahadeo Lal Tulsyan Vs. Income-tax Officer and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-22-1974
Reported in: [1977]110ITR637(Cal)
Amiya Kumar Mookerjee, J.1. This rule is directed against a notice under Section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, dated March 30, 1970, for reassessment in respect of assessment year 1961-62, issued by the respondent No. 1.2. The petitioner is a partner of the firm, M/s. Calcutta Hardware Stores, which carries on business as a dealer in black sheet, sheet cutting and tinkers. On the 1st of April 1970, the petitioner received a notice dated March 30, 1970, issued by the respondent No. 1 under Section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, to reopen the assessment for the year 1961-62, on the reasonable belief that the income of the assessee-firm has escaped assessment. It alleged that the notice under Section 148 was served by affixation in the office of the petitioner. The petitioner being aggrieved against the said notice moved this court in an application under Article 226 of the Constitution and obtained the present rule.3. Mr. Mullick, appearing on behalf of the petitioner contended that...
Tag this Judgment!Chhogmal Agarwalla Vs. Income-tax Officer, a Ward and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-21-1974
Reported in: [1975]100ITR29(Cal)
Sabyasachi Mukharji, J.1. In this appeal we are concerned with the assessment year 1961-62. On the 14th March, 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, against the petitioner for the aforesaid year. oN 31st of March, 1966, an order of assessment was passed against the firm, Jaswantrai & Bros. This was a registered firm of which the petitioner was a partner. The said assessment was also for the aforesaid assessment year 1961-62. Thereafter, 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. 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. It has to be borne in mind that the Income-tax Act, 1961, came into effect from 1st of April, 1962. On the 12th May, 1966, resp...
Tag this Judgment!A.K. Basu Vs. I.C.i. (India) Private Limited and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-21-1974
Reported in: (1975)ILLJ239Cal
Sabyasachi Mukharji, J.1. Ashim Kumar Basu, the appellant here is employed in the establishment of I.C.I. (India) Private Ltd., the respondent No. 1 herein. The appellant made an application under Section 14 of the West Bengal Shops and Establishments Act, 1963 before the Referee for payment of wage amounting to Rs. 110. 66 alleging the said sum had been unlawfully deducted by the said respondent No. 1. The said application was made on October 21, 1967. The claim related to dues on account of overtime. It appears, that subsequently the appellant filed another application whereby he amended the claim and sought relief only in respect of Rs. 97. 25. The respondent No. 1 disputed the claim of the appellant and on February 6,1968 the Referee under the aforesaid Act made an order directing payment of Rs. 97. 25 to the appellant under Section 14(3) of the West Bengal Shops and Establishments Act, 1963. The claim of the appellant was on the basis that in respect of overtime work done by him i...
Tag this Judgment!Sukharanjan Sarkar Vs. Mackinnon Mackenzie and Co. (Pvt.) Ltd. and anr ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-20-1974
Reported in: 1974CriLJ1446
A.N. Banerjee, J.1. This Rule was obtained against an order dated 8-8-73 rejectingan application under Section 145 of Merchant Shipping Act. 1958. On 20-2-72 the petitioner filed an application before the Chief Presidency Magistrate claiming a total sum of Rs. 6, 277.65 P. as per paragraph 9 of the petition. The learned Chief Presidency Magistrate issued notices upon the opposite parties to show cause why they would not pay the aforesaid sum to the petitioner. On service of notices the opposite parties duly appeared and filed written objections to the claim of the petitioner. Thereafter on 30-5-72 the learned Chief Presidency Magistrate transferred the case to the Court of Presidency Magistrate Third Court, Calcutta, After hearing both the parties and considering the evidence before him the learned Magistrate found that after the payment of Rs. 3, 736.61p., on 18.5.72 i.e., during the pendency of the application, the petitioner was not entitled to the balance sum of Rs. 2, 541.olp. (Rs...
Tag this Judgment!Kanai Lal Agarwalla Vs. the State and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-19-1974
Reported in: 1975CriLJ1143
A.N. Banerjee, J.1. This Rule is directed against an order dated 29-6-1973 passed by the learned Additional Chief Presidency Magistrate, Calcutta, by which he recalled his order under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and discharged the accused persons.2. What happened is as follows : On 1-5-1973 the petitioner, Kanai Lal Agarwalla, filed an application under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure before the learned Additional Chief Presidency Magistrate against the accused Nos. 1 to 3 and prayed for a direction for investigation by the police. On the same day the learned Magistrate directed the Deputy Commissioner of Police of the Detective Department, Calcutta, to take cognizance and to investigate. Accordingly the police took cognizance and a case was started on the basis of the petition filed by the petitioner under Sections 380/420/406/120-B Of the Indian Penal Code. In course of investigation three more persons surrendered in court and they were also show...
Tag this Judgment!income-tax Officer, 'M' Ward and Ors. Vs. Textile Mills Agents P. Ltd. ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-18-1974
Reported in: [1981]130ITR733(Cal)
Sabyasachi Mukharji, J. 1. The assessment for the assessment year 1963-64 for income-tax was completed on August 31, 1965. In the saidassessment, the assessee claimed deductions on account of payment of certain interest to various parties including, inter alia, the Murshidabad Jute Co. It appears that the account in the name of Murshidabad Jute Co. originated for the first time, according to the assessee, in the relevant financial year for the assessment year 1963-64 when credits aggregating to Rs. 90,000 figured on nine different dates. The said interest was allowed. Thereafter, there was assessment of the assessee for the assessment year 1964-65, which was completed on December 30, 1967. In the said assessment, the ITO examined the accounts and came to the conclusion that the transaction with Murshidabad Jute Co. was fictitious and for this purpose he relied on certain confessions alleged to have been made by one Sewlal Jain, who is the proprietor of the said Murshidabad Jute Co. The...
Tag this Judgment!income-tax Officer, c Ward and ors. Vs. Ryam Sugar Company Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-15-1974
Reported in: [1976]105ITR819(Cal)
Sabyasachi Mukharji, J.1. This appeal arises out of an order and judgment passed by Sankar Prasad Mitra J. (as the Chief Justice then was) dated the 18th of February, .1969. It appears that the petitioner was assessed for the assessment year 1958-59 on a total income of Rs. 2,04,223. The said assessment was made on the 20th of March, 1969. Upon this the tax computed was Rs. 1,04,019.54. It appears that the petitioner was given rebate at 30%. The asses see-petitioner preferred an appeal against the aforesaid order of assessment. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner disposed of the appeal by his order dated the 21st of October, 1960. Before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner the only contention that was urged and upon which the appeal was allowed was the non-allowance of a sum of Rs. 14,354. The assessee had written off certain stores from its books in its accounting year for 1952-53. This amount was disallowed and added back in the assessment year 1952-53. In the subsequent years the ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »