Kolkata Court February 1978 Judgments
Ratan Chand Khanna Vs. Mahendra Kumar
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-28-1978
Reported in: AIR1979Cal55
ORDERPadma Khastgir, J.1. This application has been taken out by the plaintiff for amendment of the plaint. This application has been taken out after the application which has been taken out by the defendant for an order for dismissal of the suit or in the alternative for taking off the plaint from the file was heard by me. The said application was moved on 19th Dec. 1977. In para. 8 of the said petition it has been stated by the plaintiff that there are certain mistakes in calculation which were due to bona fide mistakes and were not known and realised by the plaintiff. As such under the said circumstances the plaint should be amended to rectify those mistakes. It is the plaintiff's further case that although interest has been claimed in the original plaint but through inadvertence the agreement for payment of the interest has not been pleaded in the original plaint. In the premises, the plaintiff craves leave to amend the plaint to include appropriate pleadings to that effect. Accord...
Tag this Judgment!Food Corporation of India Vs. Birendra Nath Dhar
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-28-1978
Reported in: AIR1978Cal264,82CWN611
M.M. Dutt, J.1. This Rule is directed against order No. 57 dated Jan. 13, 1977 of the Subordinate Judge, 1st. Court, Alipore, directing the defendant-petitioner, the Food Corporation of India, to produce certain documents for the inspection of the plaintiff-opposite party.2. The suit out of which this Rule arises has been instituted by the opposite party, praying for a decree for Rs. 96,880.34 with interest at 12% per annum. The case of the opposite party is that he was appointed by the petitioner as a transport contractor to carry foodstuffs by boat to different places within the district of 24-Par-ganas and the neighbouring districts of West Bengal, from the railway sidings to food depots. According to the movement orders given by the authorities of the Food Corporation of India, goods were being carried by the opposite party from one place to another and bills were being handed over to the representatives concerned. They were accepted for payment after verification. It is alleged th...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Central India Industries Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-28-1978
Reported in: [1978]113ITR326(Cal)
Sabyasachi Mukharji, J. 1. We are concerned in this reference with the assessment year 1960-61, the relevant previous year being the financial year ending on the 31st March, 1960. The assessee had shown a profit of Rs. 15,571 on sale of investment and this found place in its profit and loss account. When the Income-tax Officer went into the question of levying capital gains on these transactions, the assessee requested substitution of the fair market value of the shares as on the 1st day of January, 1954, under the second proviso to Sub-section (2) of Section 12B of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, in place of cost price. The Income-tax Officer worked out the fair market value of the shares on the basis of the break-up value as on the 1st January, 1954, at Rs. 14.62 per share. With regard to the sale price the Income-tax Officer found that the sales were effected by the assessee at Rs. 2.25 per share. On the facts of the case, the Income-tax Officer held that the sales were to persons ...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. New India Investment Corporation Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-28-1978
Reported in: [1978]113ITR778(Cal)
Dipak Kumar Sen, J.1. This reference is at the instance of the Commissioner of Income-tax, West Bengal-II, Calcutta, under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. This court has directed the Tribunal to draw up a case and refer the following question :' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the Income-tax Officer was not justified in apportioning the total expenditure incurred by the assessee as between the several heads of income and treating the appropriate portion thereof as expenditure against the dividend income '2. The facts admitted and/or found are in short as follows : New IndiaInvestment Corporation Ltd., the assessee, is an investment company andalso deals in shares. The assessee derives income from business, interest onsecurities, dividends and other sources.3. In its income-tax assessments for the assessment years 1963-64, 1964-65 and 1965-66, the assessee claimed deduction of its expenditure respectively of ...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Sahibganj Electric Cables Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-27-1978
Reported in: [1983]144ITR422(Cal)
Sabyasachi Mukharji, J. 1. The question involved in this case is whether the Tribunal was right in holding that the order under Section 23A of the Indian I.T. Act, 1922, was not justified in law. 2. It appears that there was an addition of about Rs. 80,000 made by the ITO as from undisclosed sources. The ITO added these amounts on the ground that the alleged loans covering these amounts had not been proved satisfactory. The assessee disputed that amount up to the Tribunal, but, before the Tribunal the assessee accepted the position that out of Rs. 80,000, loans amounting to Rs. 40,000 were not genuine. Therefore, the Tribunal sustained the addition of the loan of Rs. 40,000 but deleted the other Rs. 40,000. We have today confirmed the said deletion of Rs. 40,000. But the fact remains that Rs. 40,000 of the loans were deleted from the total income of the assessee as computed by the ITO. This amount, that is to say, the amount of total income as computed by the Tribunal after upholding t...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Jiya Jeerao Cotton Mills Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-27-1978
Reported in: [1979]118ITR72(Cal)
C.K. Banerji, J.1. This reference at the instance of the Commissioner of Income-tax, West Bengal-I, Calcutta, under Section 66(1) of the Indian I.T. Act, 1922 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), relates to the assessment years 1951-52 and 1952-53, for which the relevant previous years ended on the 31st March, 1951, and 31st March, 1952, respectively.2. The assessee is a company resident in India with its mills in Gwalior. The income that accrued in the former State of Gwalior was entitled to concessional treatment while the income that accrued in Part A and C States (as they were then called) were liable to be taxed at full Indian rates of tax as levied by the Finance Acts.3. The facts found and/or admitted as appearing in the statement of the case are as follows :In the assessment for the assessment year 1951-52, originally made on the 14th October, 1955, profits were estimated by the ITO and assessed by him as being Part B State income and at a lower rate.4. Subsequently, the ITO...
Tag this Judgment!Kesoram Industries and Cotton Mills Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-ta ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-27-1978
Reported in: [1978]115ITR143(Cal)
Sabyasachi Mukharji, J.1. We are concerned in this reference with the assessment year 1963-64, the relevant previous year being the one which ended on 31st March, 1963.2. The assessee is a company engaged in the manufacture of cotton textiles, rayon, yarn and also transparent paper. One of the grounds of appeal taken before the Tribunal from the order of the Income-tax Officer was in relation to taxability of a sum of Rs. 5,85,701 received by the asses-see under the export incentive scheme. In the profit and loss account for the year ended on 31st March, 1963, there was a credit of Rs. 6,00,826 which included the said sum of Rs. 5,85,701. The assessee had shown this sum in Section 'F' of the return but claimed exemption from tax on the ground that the same was a casual receipt. The Income-tax Officer rejected the claim on inter alia the following grounds :'This receipt has been earned by the assessee in the course of its business as a textile manufacturer and is being accounted for by ...
Tag this Judgment!Union of India (Uoi) Vs. Raj Kumari Narendra Kumari
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-27-1978
Reported in: [1978]113ITR299(Cal)
M.M. Dutt, J.1. This rule is at the instance of the revenue and it is directed against the order of the Additional District Magistrate, 24-Parganas, cancelling the certificate issued by the Income-tax Officer, to the Tax Recovery Officer, 24-Parganas, for the recovery of the amount of penalty imposed on the opposite party, Raj Kumari Narendra Kumari, for her failure to pay advance tax for the quarter ended December 31, 1962, for the financial year 1962-63. The rule has been referred to the Division Bench by C.N. Laik J. for, in the opinion of the learned judge, it involves certain intricate questions of law.2. The principal point that is involved in this rule is whether for the penalty levied on the assessee by the Income-tax Officer under Section 221 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, hereinafter referred to as the Act, a certificate can be issued under Section 222 of the Act for the recovery of the amount of penalty. The learned Additional District Magistrate is of the view that no penalty...
Tag this Judgment!Waldies Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-24-1978
Reported in: [1978]115ITR286(Cal)
Sudhindra Mohan Guha, J.1. This is a reference under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The facts of the case are as follows:The ITO completed the income-tax assessment for the assessment year 1964-65 on March 29, 1965, and determined the tax payable by Messrs. Waldies Ltd., at about Rs. 1,68,000. The assessment under the Surtax Act was made on March 30, 1965. Later on, the ITO thought that he had wrongly held the assessee-company to be a widely held company and, therefore, resorted to Section 147 for the purpose of withdrawing the concession granted to it on the basis that it was a widely-held company. This order under Section 147 was passed in September, 1968. The AAC cancelled this order under Section 147 in November, 1970. In March, 1971, the ITO gave effect to the AAC's order under the Income-tax Act. In April, 1971, the ITO thought of rectifying the order under Section 13 of the Companies Profits (Surtax) Act, 1964, passed in September, 1968. The order under Section 13 o...
Tag this Judgment!Prafulla Kumar Ghosh Vs. the State
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-24-1978
Reported in: 1978CriLJ1497
ORDERSudhamay Basu, J.1. This Rule concerns an order passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Alipore 6th Court, in Sessions Trial No. 3 of May 1976 rejecting the prayer of the petitioner to remit the case Under Section 228 : of the Code of Criminal Procedure to the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Alipore to try the alleged offences Under Sections 406 and 467 of the Indian Penal Code.2. In this case on a complaint being filed after investigation the police submitted a charge sheet Under Sections 406 and 467 of the Indian Penal Code. In March, 1973 the learned Magistrate proceeded to enquire into the allegations under chapter 18 of the old Code for committing the accused. While the enquiry was pending the new Criminal Procedure Code came into force. The petitioner was committed to the court of session and the learned Additional Sessions Judge took up the case for framing charges on the 14th of May, 1976. Objections were raised on behalf of the petitioner that inasmuch as the new Criminal Pro...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »