Kolkata Court January 1976 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.
Saktipada Mandal and ors. Vs. Collector, District Hooghly and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-20-1976
Reported in: AIR1976Cal282
ORDERBimal Chandra Basak, J.1. In this application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners are challenging an order of requisition of land under Section 3(1) of West Bengal Land (Requisition and Acquisition) Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act) passed by the respondent No. 1. The petitioners' case as made out in the petition is as follows :The petitioners are inhabitants of the village named Anur situated in the district of Hooghly on the border line of the district of Bankura. The said village was a non-irrigated area and there was a lot of difficulties in cultivation of paddy. On the representation of the villagers of the said village, the State Government has installed, about 8 years ago, a deep tube well in the northern part of the village for irrigation facilities in the said village. It is stated that the said deep tube well is the only source of irrigation in the said village and because of the said tube well, the taxes are being regularly ...
Sudhir Ch. Mukherjee Vs. Additional Commissioner, Commercial Taxes and ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-20-1976
Reported in: [1976]37STC554(Cal)
B.C. Ray, J.1. This rule is directed against an order of revision passed by the Additional Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, West Bengal, confirming the appellate order of the Assistant Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, and the order of assessment of the Commercial Tax Officer, Taltola Charge.2. The petitioner and his brother Probhat Chandra Mukherjee had been carrying on the business of florist under the name and style of S.C. Mukherjee & Sons, a partnership concern. The petitioner used to grow flowers and also to purchase flowers from the markets and resell the same as garlands and bouquets by making them according to the taste and desire of the customers. The petitioner's turnover never exceeded the taxable quantum and as such he did not get the firm registered under the Bengal Finance (Sale Tax) Act, 1941. The petitioner was not an importer nor a manufacturer. The petitioner, it was stated, maintained a tokcha khata wherein daily purchases and sales of goods were kept in the normal c...
Sudhir Ch. Mukherjee Vs. Addl. Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, West Be ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-20-1976
Reported in: (1976)5CTR(Cal)0273B
B. C. Ray, J. - This rule is directed against an order of revision passed by the Additional Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, West Bengal, confirming the appellate Commercial Tax Officer, Taltola Charge.2. The petitioner and his brother Probhat Chandra Mukherjee had been carrying on the business of florist under the name and style of S. C. Mukherjee & Sons, a partnership concern. The petitioner used to grow flowers and also to purchase flowers from the markets and resell the same as garlands and bouquets by making them according to the tests and desire of the customers. The petitioners turnover never exceeded the taxable quantum and such he did not get the firm registered under the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941. The petitioner was not an importer nor a manufacturer. The petitioner, it was stated, maintained a tockha khata wherein daily purchased and sale of goods were kept in the normal course of business.3. In pursuance of a notice under section 14 of the said Act the petitione...
Commissioner of Wealth-tax Vs. Executors to the Estate of Sir E.C. Ben ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-19-1976
Reported in: [1977]106ITR57(Cal)
Deb, J. 1. This is a reference under Section 27(1) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, concerning the estate left by late Sir Edward C. Benthal. The assessment years are 1961-62 to 1963-64. The relevant valuation date is the 31st March, each year. 2. Sir Edward died on March 5, 1961, leaving a will and several codicils, M/s. Dalhousie Holdings Ltd. are the representatives in India of the executors to the estate left by him. They were assessed to wealth-tax, but the Appellate Tribunal has set aside the assessment by holding that they were not assessable under the Act in view of the death of Sir Edward before the valuation date. Thereafter, the Tribunal referred the following question to this court at the instance of the Commissioner : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, wealth-tax assessments upon the executors to the estate of Sir E. C. Benthal (deceased) for the assessment years 1961-62, 1962-63 and 1963-64 were legally made ?' 3. Mr. B. L. Pal, the learned counsel f...
All India General Transport Corporation Ltd. Vs. Raj Kumar Mittal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-16-1976
Reported in: [1978]48CompCas604(Cal)
Salil K. Roy Chowdhury, J.1. This is a winding-up petition which was presented on 19th of November, 1975, and on the returnable date being 24th of November, 1975, direction was given to serve notice on the company and thereafter, on the 8th of December, 1975, directions were given for filing affidavits to the company to show cause, if any, as to why the winding-up petition should not be admitted and the petitioning-creditor was also given leave to file affidavit-in-reply and, thereafter, the matter was heard.2. The petitioning-creditor obtained a decree dated the 18th of October, 1972, from the Second Joint Civil Judge (Junior Division) at Baroda in Suit No. 606 of 1971. The petitioning-creditor's claim arose out of the non-delivery of goods carried by the company which were alleged to be missing and damaged. Thereafter, the petitioning-creditor served a statutory notice of demand under Section 434 of the Companies Act, 1956, dated the 26th of March, 1975, on the company for payment of...
MohiddIn Molla Vs. Jitendranath Karmakar and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-14-1976
Reported in: AIR1976Cal288
ORDERR. Bhattacharya, J.1. This revisional application has been filed by the defendant of the original suit against an order passed by the learned Munsif on 25-3-1974 rejecting the petitioner's application under Section 4 of the Partition Act. The opposite party is opposing the application.2. The opposite party Jitendra Nath Karamkar filed a suit for partition against the petitioner Mohiuddin Molla and others. There has been a preliminary decree for partition. Thereafter when poceedings were going on for final decree, the petitioner Mohiuddin filed a petition under Section 4 of the Partition Act. The plaintiff opposed and the learned Munsif found that the entire suit property was not the dwelling house of the defendant's family. It has also been held by the learned Munsif that as previously a petition was filed on similar ground and since it was rejected, the subsequent application under Section 4 of the Partition Act was not maintainable. On these grounds the defendant's petition was ...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Sabitri Chatterjee
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-14-1976
Reported in: [1978]115ITR744(Cal)
Deb, J.1. This is a reference under Section 256(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961, and it arises out of a penalty proceeding.2. The assessee is a reputed film star and a stage actress. The assessment year is 1960-61. The previous year is the financial year. By rejecting the explanation offered by the assessee in respect of certain receipts, the ITO brought certain sums to tax as stated in the statement of the case. The said assessment was made on July 9, 1964, in which the ITO has made the following endorsement:'Issue a notice under Section 274 to the assessee to explain why penalty should not be imposed under Section 271(1)(a) for concealment of the income assessed under other sources, under house property and professional income, concealed earlier.'3. On July 22, 1964, the ITO issued a notice under Section 274 read with Section 271 of the I.T. Act, 1961, and referred the case, under Section 274(2) of the Act, to the IAC on August 12, 1964. The TAG issued the show-cause notice on October 23, 1...
Dhanraj JaIn and ors. Vs. B.K. Biswas and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-14-1976
Reported in: 1976CriLJ1297
Sudhamay Basu, J.1. This rule relates to an order dated the 8th of February, 1975, passed by Shri R.N. Kali, learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 11th Court, Calcutta, framing charges under Section 5 of the Imports and Exports (Control) Act, 1947, read with Section 120-B, I.P.C. against the accused petitioners in case No. C/2140 of 1941 (Sic) (1971?) and for quashing the proceedings in the said case.2. It appears that Sri B. K. Biswas, Deputy Chief Controller of Import and Export filed a complaint on 23-9-1971 before the learned Chief Presidency Magistrate for some offences under Section 5 of the Imports and Exports (Control) Act, 1947, read with Section 120-B I.P.C. against the petitioners and another alleging that the petitioners Dhanraj Jain and Sushil Kumar Jain were the partners of M/s. D. R. Kumar Brothers of P/10, New Howrah Bridpe Approach Road, Calcutta, and of M/s. Orient Trade Enterprises, 2/78, Rup-nagar, Delhi, both the firms being registered with Director of Industries, Harya...
Ramchandra Pande Vs. the State of West Bengal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-09-1976
Reported in: AIR1976Cal164
Bimal Chandra Basak, J. 1. In this application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the petitioner is praying for appropriate writs directed against The West Bengal Ordinance No. XXI of 1975 promulgated by the Governor of West Bengal and against the Notifications, Notices, Directions, Rules and/or Orders, if any pursuant thereto. The facts of the case as would appear from the petition lie in a short compass.2. In the petition it has been alleged that the petitioner is a citizen of India and that he is a Hindu by religion following religious festivals and occasions honestly. In Paush Sankranti every year the Ganga Sagar Mela is held in the sangam of Ganga and Sagar at the Sagar Island on the occasion of Ganga Sagar Mela every year, hereinafter referred to as the said Mela. The petitioner and other Hindus observing the said Mela visit the said Sagar Island in paush sankranti every year and also the Kapil Muni Temple and worship and perform Pujas, Darsan etc. with great religiou...
Kishori Lal Lakkar Vs. Income-tax Officer, 'A' Ward and Ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-07-1976
Reported in: [1978]113ITR282(Cal)
Sabyasachi Mukharji, J. 1. This is an application challenging an order passed by the Income-tax Officer cancelling the registration of a firm. The order is dated the 30th March, 1973. The order relates to the assessment year 1964-65. It appears that the firm had been granted registration prior to the relevant year and the firm had filed an application for renewal of the registration and the same was granted at the time of the original assessment which was passed some time in March, 1969. Thereafter, it appears that on the 15th March, 1973, a notice was issued which was to the following effect:'Subject: Cancellation of registration Under Section 186 of the I.T. Act, 1961--For asst. years 1964-65, 1965-66 and 1966-67. This is to give you notice that after enquiry it is gathered that there was no genuine firm in existence during the above-mentioned assessment years as one of the partners, Sri Nandram Jhunjhunwalla, is found to be a non-existing person. Under the circumstances, you are req...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »