Kolkata Court February 1975 Judgments
Soorajmal Srigopal Vs. Income-tax Officer, 'F' Ward and Ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-27-1975
Reported in: [1979]117ITR326(Cal)
Sabyasachi Mukharji, J.1. The challenge in this case is to the notice issued under Section 148 of the I.T. Act, 1961, dated 23rd February, 1972. The impugned notice was issued for the assessment year 1963-64. It was contended, firstly, that there are no materials for the ITO to form the belief that there was any failure or omission on the part of the assessee to disclose fully or truly any material or relevant fact or that as a result of such failure the income of the assessee has escaped assessment. It was, secondly, contended that the Commissioner was not competent on the facts and circumstances of the case to grant sanction for reopening. It was urged that there was no application of mind by the Commissioner. In answer to the rule nisi issued in this case in the affidavit in opposition on behalf of the respondent it was stated, inter alia, as follows :'(a) The original assessment for the assessment year 1963-64 was completed on 31st August, 1964, under Section 143(3) of the Act on a...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Partabmull Rameshwar
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-26-1975
Reported in: 80CWN136,[1977]107ITR526(Cal)
Deb, J.1. In this reference under Section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, we are concerned with the following question of law :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the sum of Rs. 2,68,545 being the balance to the credit of the Pakistan duty account can be assessed to tax as the income of the assessment year 1955-56, because of the distribution of this amount among the partners in the relevant previous year ?'2. This reference relates to the assessment year 1955-56. The relevant previous year is 2011 R. N. ending on March 31, 1955. The assessee is a registered firm and follows the mercantile system of accounting. In R. N.years 2004 and 2005, relevant for the assessment years 1948-49 and 1949-50, the assessee purchased jute in Pakistan and sold them to the merchants in India and abroad. On November 14, 1947, a duty on raw jute exported from Pakistan was imposed by the Government of Pakistan: Accordingly, in those years, the assessee in terms of Section 6...
Tag this Judgment!The Khardah Company Ltd. Vs. Commercial Tax Officer, Esplanade Charge ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-24-1975
Reported in: [1976]37STC382(Cal)
Chittatosh Mookerjee, J.1. The petitioner-company is a registered dealer both under the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941, and under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. The petitioner's jute mill is also registered under the Bengal Raw Jute Taxation Act, 1941. During the material period it had purchased raw jute from the sellers in the State of West Bengal, Assam, Bihar, Orissa and Andhra Pradesh and had processed, weaved and fabricated the same in its mill and then sold the processed and fabricated jute goods.2. The petitioner has stated that during the relevant period it had deposited tax under the Bengal Raw Jute Taxation Act, 1941, called the Jute Tax Act, at the rate of three per cent of the value of the purchase of raw jute inside West Bengal and had furnished return under the said Act. The petitioner has also claimed that it had furnished returns both under the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941, and under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, for the four quarters ending 31st Marc...
Tag this Judgment!Radha Prosad Keshri Vs. Superintendent of Suri Jail and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-24-1975
Reported in: 1975CriLJ1048
Bimal Chandra Basak, J.1. This is an application for Bail in an application for a Writ of Habeas Corpus which is directed against an order of detention passed bv the District Magistrate. Birbhum on the 28th January! 1975 in exercise of powers conferred bv subsection (1) read with Sub-section (2) of Section 3 of the Maintenance of Internal Security Act. 1971 (hereinafter referred to as 'the said Act'). The said order has been passed with a view to prevent the detenu from acting in anv manner prejudicial to the maintenance of supplies essential to the community. The grounds of detention fieryed on the detenu read as follows:-(1) On 8-11-1974 between 15.30 hrs, and 18.00 hrs. at Bharsalapara, p. S. Ram-purhat during inspection of stock and accounts of vour licensed sodown bv S. I. A. G, Dewan of D. E. B. and other witnesses in vour presence there actual stock of 391 bags of cement were found against book balance of 439 baPs and sale of 5 bags of1 cement on 8-11-1974 and there was shortage...
Tag this Judgment!Swapan Chandra Vs. the State
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-20-1975
Reported in: 1975CriLJ1051
Sudhamay Basu, J.1. This Rule relates to an order dated 7th of Mav. 1974 passed bv the District Magistrate, 24-pafr-ganas in exercise of the powers conferred upon him under Sub-section (1) read with Sub-section (2) of Section 3 of the Maintenance of Internal Security Act. 1971 with a view to preventing the detenu from acting in a manner preiudicial to the maintenance of public order. The grounds served upon the detenu are two of which the first ground is as follows:-2. On 9-3-1974 at about 15.30 hrs. you alona with vour associates namelv 1. LaltuDas. 2. Sunil. 3. Rantu Singh and others demanded monev from Sudarsan Mukherii of Noapara. P. S. Barasat at Dut-' tapurkurhat. As Sri Sudarsan Mukher.ii refused to pay the money, you alonp with your associates seriously assaulted him and snatched awav his wrist watch. In consequence of vour such activity. thp public order in the locality was seriously disturbed, in that the people who assembled in the Hat for marketing, ran awav helter skelter ...
Tag this Judgment!Jnan Ranian Banerjee Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-19-1975
Reported in: 1975CriLJ1258
Bimal Chandra Basak, J.1. In this application for a Writ in the nature of Habeas Corpus the petitioner is challenging an order of detention passed by the Commissioner of Police, Calcutta, on the 10th June, 1974, in exercise of powers conferred by Sub-section (1) (a) (ii) read with Sub-section (2) of Section 3 of the Maintenance of Internal Security Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act). The said order was passed with a view to preventing the detenu. Amiya Kumar Banerjee, from acting in any manter prejudicial to the maintenance of public order. The two incidents relied upon in the grounds served on the detenu are set out hereinbelow.(1) That at about 18.30 hours on 2-12-1973, you along with your associates being armed with bombs and bottles formed an unlawful assembly on Lake View Road and created a great disturbance of public order by exploding bombs and hurling bottles at random near the crossing of Sarat Banerji Road and Lake View Road at the aforesaid date and time wit...
Tag this Judgment!Amulya Ratan Mukherjee and ors. Vs. Kali Pada Tah and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-18-1975
Reported in: AIR1975Cal200
R. Bhattacharya, J.1. This appeal is by some of the defendants against the decision of the 1st Additional Court of the Subordinate Judge, Burdwan in Title Appeal No. 37 of 1960 affirming the judgment and decree passed by the Court of the Munsif at Kalna in Title Suit No. 31 of 1958 in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendants.2. In short, the plaint allegation is that on .06 acre of land appertaining to C. S. plot No. 850 under khatian No. 342 in Mouza Madhupur, the plaintiff Kalipada Tan constructed two shop rooms which are the subject-matter of the suit. The landlords in respect of the land in C. S. plot No. 850 were Manmatha Chat-terjee and others. Subsequently the defendant No. 25 purchased the interest of the landlords and became the landlord of the plaintiff. The plaintiff had his own shops in the two rooms on the land in plot No. 850 upto 1340 B. S. Later on he let out the suit rooms to one Kalipada Mukherjee who carried on his sweetmeat shop there upto Chaitra, 1354 B....
Tag this Judgment!Rabindra N. Das Vs. Santosh Kumar Mitra and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-18-1975
Reported in: AIR1975Cal381
ORDERSabyasachi Mukharji, J. 1. This suit was originally instituted by one Asit Kumar Sarkar and Debasis Sarkar claiming to be trustees in respect of premises No. 49B, Sashi Bhusan Dey Street, Calcutta against the defendants. Thereafter, Rabindra Nath Das was substituted in the place and stead of the original plaintiffs. About the substitution I will deal later. The case of the plaintiff is that premises No. 49B, Sashi Bhusan Dey Street, Calcutta, originally belonged to one Smt. Provabati Biswas (since deceased) who during her lifetime by a deed of settlement and/or trust dated 2nd of July, 1946 had settled the said premises for the purposes and/or trust for the benefit of the persons and for the objects therein mentioned in the said deed of trust. About the said deed of trust I will also deal later on. According to the plaintiff the original trustees, viz., Smt. Provabati Biswas and Shri Pradyut Kumar Sarkar acted as trustees and gave effect to the said trust. The original defendants ...
Tag this Judgment!Samar Som Vs. Sm. Sadhana Som
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-13-1975
Reported in: AIR1975Cal413
M.M. Dutt, J.1. This appeal is at the instance of the husband against his wife and it arises out of a proceeding under Section 12(1)(a) of the Hindu Marriage Act.2. The appellant, who is the husband, made an application under Section 12(1)(a) of the Act. The marriage between the parties was solemnised on May 7, 1965, according to the Hindu rites. It was alleged that prior to the marriage the respondent had undergone an operation on June 28, 1955, by which her uterus was removed and as such, she was impotent at the time of the marriage and was unfit for consummation or bearingchild to the appellant and was continuing to be so till the date of the presentation of the said application. Further, it was alleged that the respondent was always averse to marital relations with the appellant who had recently been able to find out the cause of such aversion.3. On the aforesaid allegations the appellant prayed that the marriage between the parties might be annulled by the court by a decree of nul...
Tag this Judgment!In Re: Nikhilesh Nanda
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-13-1975
Reported in: 1975CriLJ1137
Sudhamay Basu, J.1. Mr. Somnath Chatterjee appearing in support of the Rule made submissions as to the scope and nature of the Court's power for granting bail in cases of preventive detention. He pointed out that it would be wrong to proceed on the orthodox line viz. that bail could be granted only when it appeared to the Court, prima facie, that the petition was bound to succeed. He referred to the recent changes in the Criminal Procedure Code whereby the powers of both the High Court and the Sessions Court have been considerably enlarged. Mr. Chatterjee argued that no statutory guidelines were there to circumscribe the court's powers which were very wide. The powers of a High Court were not inhibited in any way. In this connection he referred to the recent case of M. A. Rashid v. The State of Kerala, reported in : [1975]2SCR93 . In that case Ray, C. J., held that administrative decisions in exercise of powers even if conferred in subjective terms are to be made in good faith on relev...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »