Kolkata Court January 1978 Judgments
Sm. Jharna Ghosal Vs. Satyendra Prosad Dhar
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-31-1978
Reported in: AIR1978Cal274,(1978)1CompLJ193(Cal),82CWN335
M.M. Dutt, J.1. These two Rules have been referred to the Division Bench by A. Bhattacharya J.2. The principal point that is involved in these Rules is whether an order recording abatement of a suit under Section 57-B incorporated in the West Bengal Estates Acquisition Act, 1953, hereinafter referred to as the Act, by the West Bengal Estates Acquisition (Second Amendment) Act, 1973, is an appealable order. There are two conflicting decisions on the point, In Amritamay Ghosh v. State of West Bengal, (1976) 80 Cal WN 205, R, Bhattacharya J. has expressed the view that an appeal lies against such an order and a revisional application under Section 115 of the Civil P. C. is not maintainable. In support of his view Bhattacharya J. has placed reliance on two Bench decisions of this Court, one in Naimuddin Biswas v. Moniruddin Laskar, 32 Cal WN 299: (AIR 1928 Cal 184) and the other in Sabitribai v. Jugal Kishore, AIR 1938 Cal 639, and a decision of the Madras High Court in Subbayya v. Saminad...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Panchanan Das
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-31-1978
Reported in: [1979]116ITR272(Cal)
Sen, J.1. This appeal arises out of acquisition proceedings taken under Chapter XX-A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, initiated in respect of transfer of premises No. 55, Malanga Lane, Calcutta, by one Anil Charan Law to Panchanan Das, the respondent in these proceedings. The transfer was effected by a registered deed dated 30th May, 1973, and the consideration therefor was Rs. 41,000.2. It is not in dispute that the premises No. 55, Malanga Lane, Calcutta (hereinafter referred to as 'the said property') consisted of 6 cottahs 8 chataks of land with a partly two-storeyed and partly three-storeyed building thereon. The covered area on the ground floor of the building was 3,700 sq, ft., the area on the first floor was 3,177 sq. ft. and on the second floor 150 sq. ft.3. On receiving information of the aforesaid transfer the competent authority appointed under Section 269B of the I.T. Act, 1961, felt that the apparent consideration for the said transfer was less than the fair market value of t...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. H.V. Yazdi
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-31-1978
Reported in: [1978]114ITR14(Cal)
Sabyasachi Mukharji, J. 1. We are concerned in this case with the question arising in connection with the assessment years 1966-67 and 1967-68 for which the relevant accounting years ended on the 31st March, 1966, and the 31st March, 1967, respectively. The assesses is an individual. He was, in the relevant years, a branch manager of Messrs. Iran Tea Trading Co. Private Ltd. During the two years under consideration the assessee had received commission in lieu of salary and, therefore, according to the Income-tax Officer, the assessee was not entitled to any exemption under Section 10(13A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, in respect of the house-rent allowance received by him from Messrs. Iran Tea Trading Co. Private Ltd. The assessee had received house-rent allowance of Rs. 6,600 in each of the two years under consideration. The Income-tax Officer included the same in the respective assessments for the two years. There were appeals before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. It appears th...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. India Tobacco Co. Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-31-1978
Reported in: [1978]114ITR182(Cal)
Sabyasachi Mukharji, J.1. The familiar, yet not always easy, question as to whether a particular expenditure is capital or revenue falls for adjudication in this reference under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961.2. The assessee is the India Tobacco Co. Ltd., formerly known as the Imperial Tobacco Co. of India Ltd. The relevant assessment year is 1962-63 and the accounting year is the year ending on 31st March, 1962. In the relevant year the assessee had a factory at Monghyr in Bihar. It had acquired a piece of land and had constructed a hospital thereon. But by the time the hospital was ready, the Employees' Insurance Scheme came into operation. The Government of Bihar required the hospital in pursuance of this. Some negotiations thereafter took place between the assessee-company, the Government and the workers' union. Eventually, a memorandum of settlement dated the 12th August, 1961, was arrived at under Section 18(3) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The actual terms an...
Tag this Judgment!Sadhan Ch. Koley and ors. Vs. Dulal Bibi and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-30-1978
Reported in: AIR1978Cal269,82CWN416
ORDERSalil Kumar Datta, J.1. This Rule is directed against an appellate order passed by the appellate authority on the 22nd of Aug., 1976 whereby the appeal was dismissed and the decision of the Special Officer under the West Bengal Restoration of Alienated Land Act, 1973 dated the 28th of April, 1975 was affirmed. The material facts are that on the 12th of Jan., 1972 Dulali Debi for self and as guardian of her minor sons sold about 18 sataks of raiyati land described in the schedule to the kobala to Sadhan Chandra Koley, petitioner No. 1 in this Rule. In the kobala it was stated that for the purpose of debt incurred for treatment of minor sons and their maintenance and for other necessary expenses she urgently required the money and sold the suit property to petitioner No. 1 for Rs. 200/-. On or about the 17th of May, 1974 Dulali Debi filed a petition under Section 4 of the said Act and Rule 3 (1) of the West Bengal Restoration of Alienated Land Rules for effecting restoration to her ...
Tag this Judgment!State of West Bengal Vs. Nimai Chand Kundu
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-30-1978
Reported in: AIR1978Cal347,82CWN963
Salil Kumar Datta, J. 1. This is an appeal from a decree of reversal. The plaintiff respondent's case is that he acquired by purchase from the recorded owners the suit lands in raiyati sthitiban interest measuring 11.97 acres by a registered kobala dated April 9, 1956 which was registered on Aug. 8, 1956. The suit lands did not vest in the State as the total area was less than the ceiling prescribed under the West Bengal Estates Acquisition Act, 1953. He could not be present to have his name recorded in the record of rights at the time of survey, as the suit lands were far away from his home and as a result the names of his vendors were recorded therein in respect of the suit lands, who did not, as obviously they could not, retain the lands, The State of West Bengal treated the lands as vested and threatened to issue rent receipts to the plaintiff's bhagchasis of the said lands. The plaintiff thereupon instituted the suit praying for confirmation of his possession on declaration of his...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax (Central) Vs. Rohtas Industries Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-30-1978
Reported in: [1979]120ITR110(Cal)
Sen, J.1. Pursuant to the directions of this court under Section 66(2) of the Indian I.T. Act, 1922, the Tribunal in these references has drawn up a consolidated statement of case and referred the following questions :1955-56 : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the cement unit, the new power house, the chemical factory and the paper plants Nos. 2 and 3 all constituted new industrial undertakings within the meaning of Section 15C of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, in respect of which the assessee was entitled to exemption from tax to the extent indicated in the Tribunal's order ?' 1956-57: '1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the cement unit, the new power house, the chemical factory and the paper plants Nos. 2 and 3 all constituted new industrial undertakings within the meaning of Section 15C of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, in respect of which the ass...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Lalit Prasad Rohini Kumar
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-27-1978
Reported in: [1979]117ITR603(Cal)
Sabyasachi Mukharji, J. 1. This reference relates to the assessment for the assessment year 1961-62. The assessee is a firm, M/s. Lalit Prasad Rohini Kumar. The assessee filed return of income on 7th August, 1963, disclosing an income of Rs. 68,046. The ITO, following the finding reached in the earlier year's assessment, held that the income which was declared by the assessee firm actually belonged to a HUF, of which Sri Ram Narayan Agarwalla was the karta at the material times. He, however, made an assessment on the assessee as a protective measure, and in doing so, he also charged interest under Section 215 of the I.T. Act, 1961. In the assessment order, he observed, inter alia, as follows:'Charge interest under Section 18A(8) as the assessee did not file an estimate voluntarily under Section 18A(3), being a person not hitherto assessed. Issue penalty notices (i) for failure to furnish the return of income within the time prescribed under Section 22(1), (ii) for failure to furnish es...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Universal Fertiliser Co. P. Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-27-1978
Reported in: [1978]114ITR47(Cal)
Sabyasachi Mukharji, J.1. We are concerned in this reference with the assessment year 1961-62. The assessee's profit and loss account showed the net income of Rs. 4,359 for the previous year relevant to the assessment year under reference. The assessment, however, was completed at first on a sum of Rs. 70,000 under Section 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Later on, the same was reopened and a revised assessment under Section 143(3) read with Section 146 was made on a total income of Rs. 27,391, inclusive of a sum of Rs. 20,500 representing certain loans, which the assessee had failed to prove. The Income-tax Officer, thereafter, passed an order under Section 23A(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922. This however, was passed on the basis of figures of assessment as made under Section 144. The assessee preferred an appeal to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner against the order of the Income-tax Officer. In appeal, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner took the total income as assessed ...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Simplex Concrete Piles (India) Pvt. Ltd ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-27-1978
Reported in: [1978]112ITR812(Cal)
Sen, J.1. In the present reference at the instance of the Commissioner of Income-tax, West Bengal-I, Calcutta, under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, this court directed the Tribunal to state a case on the following question :' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that there was a clear mistake apparent from the record within the meaning of Section 154 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and in directing the Income-tax Officer on that basis to recompute the tax according to the provisions of law laid down in the Finance Act, 1964 '2. The facts found and/or admitted in these proceedings are, inter alia, as follows. Messrs. Simplex Concrete Piles (India) Pvt. Ltd., the assessee, was assessed to income-tax in the assessment yaar 1964-65 when its toal income was assessed at Rs. 5,51,919. On appeal, this amount was reduced to Rs. 4,38,478. Thereupon, the assessee claimed that since it was engaged in the business of manufacture...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »