Kolkata Court March 1975 Judgments
M/S. Bansidhar Durgadutt Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, West Bengal I ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-25-1975
Reported in: (1976)5CTR(Cal)28
R. N. Pyne, J. - In this reference under Section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 we are concerned with two assessment years i.e. 1953-54 and 1954-55, the respective relevant previous years of which were 2009 Diwali (30-10-51 to 18-10-1952) and year ended 31-3-1953 for dividend, and 2010 Diwali (19-10-1952 to 16-11-1953) and year ended 30-3-54 for dividend. During relevant previous years the assessee held shares in three companies, namely, Dhanlakshmi Trading Corporation Private Ltd., Bhagat Land Development Private Ltd. and Shri Gouri Shankar Jute Mills Private Ltd. Undisputedly these were companies where public were not substantially interested within the meaning of Section 23-A of the Indian Income tax Act. 1922 (as it stood prior to its amendment in 1955). In course of the assessment proceedings the Income-tax Officer H.C.E.P.T., District I, Calcutta received intimation of the assessees share of dividend from the Income-tax Officer assessing the aforesaid companies conseque...
Tag this Judgment!Govind Prasad Vs. the State of West Bengal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-24-1975
Reported in: 1975CriLJ1249
N.C. Talukdar, J.1. This is an application for bail filed on behalf of one Govind Prasad Lath and is directed against an order dated the 20th March, 1975, passed by the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Calcutta, refusing the petitioner's prayer for bail in Ludhiana P. S. Case No. 620 dated 15-12-1974 under Sections 406/408/468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code. The application is with notice to the State and is opposed,2. The facts leading on to the present application can be put in a short compass, On a complaint lodged by one Sat Paul Kanwar, decribed as a partner of the Vardhman General and Spinning Mills Ltd., at P. S. Sadar Ludhiana, Ludhiana P. S. Case No. 620 dated 15-12-1974 was started under Sections 406/408/ 468/471 of the Indian Penal Code. In course, of the investigation that followed, the accused-petitioner who is stated to be a businessman living at 132/1. Mahatma Gandhi Read, Calcutta, was arrested on the 20th March, 197,5, by the Ludhiana Police with the...
Tag this Judgment!Kumarapuram Gopalakrishnan Ananthakrishnan Vs. Burdwan-cutwa Railway C ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-21-1975
Reported in: [1978]48CompCas211(Cal),81CWN137
Ramendra Mohan Datta, J. 1. In this application the petitioner, Registrar of Companies, contends that the substratum of the company, on the basis of which it was incorporated, has gone and, as such, it is just and equitable that the company be wound up.2. The assets of the company were taken over by the Government of India on April 1, 1966. The company received compensation to the extent of a sum of Rs. 17.8 lakhs. In the months of January and May, 1968, the company granted several loans out of the said sum to the total extent of about Rs. 16 lakhs to Mr. J. Mantosh, Mrs. Mantosh and Miss Daisy Mantosh upon the security of the landed property owned by them and on interest at the rate of 10% per annum.3. It is contended that the payment of the said money by way of loan in favour of the said persons was illegal, void and wholly ultra vires the memorandum of association of the company. It is further urged that the said loan had been advanced in contravention of Sub-section (2A) of Section...
Tag this Judgment!Sm. Rina Nandi Vs. the State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-20-1975
Reported in: 1976CriLJ56
Bimal Chandra Basak, J.1. This application for a writ of Habeas Corpus is directed against an order of detention passed by the Commissioner of Police, Calcutta the respondent No. 2 herein on the 2nd of December, 1974 in exercise of the powers conferred by subsection (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. Shyamal Nandi, from acting in any manner prejudicial to the security of the State. The incidents relied up- on the grounds of detention served on the detenu are as follows : (1) You being a leader of the Revolutionary Communist Unity Centre (Marxist-Leninist), now Communist Unity Centre (Marxist-Leninist), in West Bengal along with others including Biswanath Mukherji of Khardah attended a secret meeting of the said party held in a house at Seal's Garden Lane, Calcutta on 16-9-1974 wherein you along with other participan...
Tag this Judgment!Richard Winn Harcos Vs. the State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-20-1975
Reported in: 1975CriLJ1256
P.C. Borooah, J.1. This revisional application is directed against an order dated October 11, 1974, passed by Sri N. G. Choudhury, Sessions Judge. 4th Bench. City Sessions Court, Calcutta, framing charges against the accused petitioner Richard Winn Harcos and three others under Section 120-B, Indian Penal Code read with Sections 3, 6 and 9 of the Officials Secrets Act. 1923, and Sections 451/437/511, Indian Penal Code and III-4(II) Port Bye-Law as well as under Sections 3, 6 and 9 of the Official Secrets Act and Sections 437/511 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. The accused-petitioners Richard Winn Harcos, a national of the United States, was arrested on April 26, 1973, at 04.00 hours inside the King George's Dock (Extension) Calcutta (since renamed at Netaji Subhas Dock Extension). He had no authority or permit to enter the dock area and he had also in his possession diving equipment fitted with oxygen cylinder meant for naval warfare and painted in black colour for the purpose of camoufla...
Tag this Judgment!N. Dutta Majumdar Vs. Anil Kumar Bose
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-20-1975
Reported in: 1975CriLJ1595
A.N. Banerjee, J.1. On a reference made to this Court by the Chairman Disciplinary Committee No. 3 of the Bar Council of West Bengal, a Rule directing the. contemner respondent to show cause as to why he will not be committed to prison or suitably dealt with under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 for having committed contempt of the subordinate court viz. disciplinary committee of the Bar Council, was issued. It appears that the aforesaid Disciplinary Committee by a majority order dated 13-2-74 suspended Jagadish Chandra Consul, an advocate from practice for a period of five years with costs. On 23-2-74, the contemner/ respondent Anil Kumar Bose who was a Bench clerk in the first court of the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, West Bengal, Calcutta, and who had retired from service on 1-1-72 wrote a letter to the Registrar/Secretary, Bar Council of West Bengal. In that letter he stated that he had come to know about the suspension order of Sri J.C. Consul on 22-2-74 in connection...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Indian Sugar Mills Association
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-17-1975
Reported in: [1978]111ITR429(Cal)
R.N. Pyne, J. 1. In this reference under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the following question of law said to arise out of the Tribunal's order dated February 27, 1970, has been referred for this court's opinion : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the income of the assessee-association derived from the business of export of sugar and interest from current and fixed deposits were exempt from tax subject to verification by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner of the facts with reference to the provisions of section 11(1)(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?' 2. This reference relates to the assessment year 1965-66, the relevant previous year being the calendar year 1964. 3. The controversy in this reference is whether the income derived by the assessee-association from the business of export of sugar and interest from current and fixed deposits is exempt from income-tax under section 11(1)(a) of the Act. 4. It may...
Tag this Judgment!Premsukh Ganeshmull Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-17-1975
Reported in: [1977]106ITR1004(Cal)
Deb, J.1. This is a reference under Section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, and the question is as follows ;'Whether, on the facts aqd in the circumstances of the case, and having regard to the terms of the deed of partnership dated April 26, 1959, the firm constituted thereunder was eligible for registration ?'2. The reference relates to the assessment year 1960-61, and it arises out of the registration proceedings under Section 26A of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922. The assessee is a firm constituted under a deed of partnership dated April 28, 1959. The minor sons of a deceased partner, namely, Hiralal Chhajer, were admitted to the benefits of this partnership and they were given l/10th share of profits of the firm. The Income-tax Officer refused registration, for, according to him, the individual shares of those minors are not specified in this partnership deed. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner allowed the appeal filed by the assessee, on the ground that in the absenc...
Tag this Judgment!Tarak Nath Sen and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-14-1975
Reported in: AIR1975Cal337
ORDERChittatosh Mookerjee, J. 1. The petitioners Nos. 1-4 claimed to be partners of the Firm, Messrs. Shyamlal Sen and Company. The Additional Collector of Customs by his order No, 127, dated July 28, 1967 (Annexure 'D' to the petition) has confiscated under Section 111(d) of the Customs Act, 1962, read with Rule 126-M of the Defence of India Rules, 1962, 142 pieces of gold coins (disc) weighing approximately 1656 grammes which were seized on May 21, 1965 at 7, Nalini Seth Road, Calcutta. The Additional Collector by the same order has imposed on Messrs. Shyamlal Sen and Company and its partners a penalty of Rs. 10,000/- each under Section 112 of the Customs Act, 1962 and Rs. 5,000/- on each of them under Rule 126-L (16) of the Defence of India Rules.2. Mr. N. C. Banerjee, learned Advocate for the petitioners has submitted that the aforesaid order of the Additional Collector of Customs imposing penalties upon the petitioners is illegal, without jurisdiction and in violation of the princ...
Tag this Judgment!Collector of Customs and Central Excise, West Bengal and ors. Vs. Hind ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-14-1975
Reported in: AIR1975Cal368,79CWN648,1979(4)ELT313(Cal)
Sankar Prasad Mitra, C.J. 1. This appeal and Appeal No. 72 of 1973 arise out of the judgment and order of Sabyasachi Mukharji, J., D/- 13-7-1972 on an application under Article 226 of the Constitulion. The petitioners before the trial court were Messrs. Hindustan Motors Ltd. and Rajendra Prosad Jhunjhunwala, Vice-President (Finance) of the Hindustan Motors Ltd. The respondents were the Collector of Customs and Central Excise, West Bengal, several Customs Officials and the Union of India. In this judgment we propose to cover both the appeals. The appellants in the present appeal are the respondents in Appeal No. 72 of 1973. Let us discuss the relevant facts of the case. On December 15, 1967, an import licence was issued in favour of Hindustan Motors Ltd., for importing primary nickel. Items Nos. 1 and 2 of this licence are-- (1) 'Country from which consigned' and (2) 'Country of origin.' Against the aforesaid items there are blank spaces and thereafter the words 'All countries excluding...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »