Kolkata Court February 1978 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.
Ritz Continental Hotels Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Central-i ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-03-1978
Reported in: [1978]114ITR554(Cal)
Sabyasachi Mukharji, J. 1. The assessee is a limited company. The reference relates to the assessment years 1968-69 and 1969-70. The assessee-company was incorporated on 18th May, 1961, with the object of carrying on the business of hotels, restaurants, cafes, holiday camps, etc. Later on, by an order of the High Court at Calcutta passed on 21st November, 1963, M/s. A. Firpos Ltd. was amalgamated with the assessee-company and in this way the assessee-company took over the hotel business of M/s. A. Firpos Ltd. with effect from 1st November, 1963. There was a building belonging to the Life Insurance Corporation of India at No. 12, Chowringhee Road, and No. 1 Chowringhee Place, which was formerly leased out to M/s. Ritz Pvt. Ltd. for a period of 15 years with effect from 1st December, 1958. There was an agreement between the Life Insurance Corporation of India and the Ritz Pvt. Ltd. whereby the Life Insurance Corporation of India had agreed to effect additions and alterations to the build...
Suchana Roy and ors. Vs. Paresh Kr. Ray
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-03-1978
Reported in: 1978CriLJ555
ORDERSudhamay Basu, J.1. This Rule was obtained in respect of an order dated 14th July, 1976 passed by the Sub-divisional Judicial Magistrate, Kama rejecting an application of the petitioners for their discharge from the pro- secution in Case No, CR. 110 of 1976 and the proceeding thereon. It appears that on 28th December, 1974 a criminal case being C R. Case No. 405 of' 1974 was started in the court of the Sub-divisional Judicial Magistrate, Kalna, against the accused petitioners on the complaint of the opposite party No. 1, Paresh Kumar Roy, Under Sections 323, 504 and 445 of the I. P. C. On 9th March, 1976 the complainant was absent and the learned Magistrate passed an Order acquitting the accused persons Under Section 256 of the Cr. P. C No step was taken to set aside that order of acquittal. On 29th March, 1976 the complainant filed a fresh petition of complaint stating the same facts which he had stated in the previous complaint. It was a verbatim copy of the earlier complaint wi...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Indian Standard Wagon Co. Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-02-1978
Reported in: [1979]116ITR539(Cal)
Sabyasachi Mukharji, J.1. This reference arises from the assessment proceedings under the Companies (Profits) Surtax Act, 1964. We are concerned with the assessment year 1964-65, the relevant previous year ending on 31st March, 1964.2. Under the Companies (Profits) Surtax Act, 1964, there is a charge of tax on the chargeable profits of the previous year in accordance with the rule set out in the Third Schedule to that Act, 'Chargeable profits' mean the total income of the assessee computed under the I.T. Act, 1961, for any previous year and adjusted in accordance with the provisions of the First Schedule to that Act. It is not necessary for us to go into the adjustments provided in the First Schedule for the present purpose. Under Section 2(8) of the said Act there was statutory deduction for an amount equal to 10 per cent. of the capital of the company as computed in accordance with the provisions of the Second Schedule to that Act or Rs. 2,00,000, whichever. was greater. In the Secon...
Union of India (Uoi) Vs. Shamlal Dey and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-02-1978
Reported in: 1978(2)ELT523(Cal)
S.C. Majumdar, J.1. In this case the question is whether because of the discharge of the accused in the Criminal Court and also in the adjudication proceeding, it is open to the Govt. of India to move against the order of discharge passed by the Ld. Magistrate. It appears that there was an adjudication proceeding held in respect of the Gold seized and the adjudicating authority by an order confiscated the gold, but declined to impose a penalty on the opposite party. It is contended on behalf of the Customs Deptt. that the Ld. Magistrate misdirected himself in taking into consideration the order passed in the adjudication proceeding as the said order has no relevancy in a criminal trial.2. It is true that the question of double jeopardy under Article 20(2) of the Constitution of India cannot arise as between a penalty imposed by the Customs Deptt. and a criminal prosecution. It was held in the case reported in : 1983ECR1598D(SC) (Magbool Hossain v. State of Bombay) that a custom authori...
Dhirendra Ch. Bhowmick Vs. the State
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-02-1978
Reported in: 1978CriLJ637
ORDERJyotirmoyee Nag, J.1. In these Rules the petitioner prays for quashing the charge framed against the petitioner Under Section 7(1)(a)(ii) of the Essential Commodities Act for violation of Clause (7) of Iron and Steel Control Order, 1956.2. The prosecution case is that the accused, Dhirendra Chandra Bhowmick, of 23/37, Gariahat Road, Calcutta-19, is the proprietor of M/s. Dhirendra Chandra Bhowmick & Co. having its factory situated at Christhadanga, Bankura. The accused petitioner obtained steel materials amounting to about 20 metric tons valued at Rs. 2267.55 paise from the Indian Iron and Steel Co., Calcutta, for the purpose of repair and reconstruction of his factory. The accused petitioner instead of using the said steel materials for the purposes stated in his application sold awat the same in black market. It is also prosecution case that the said factory at Bankura had been closed since 1966 and the steel materials aever reached the factory site.3. Mr. Das appearing for the ...
Apeejay (Private) Limited Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax (Central)
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-01-1978
Reported in: [1978]114ITR544(Cal)
Sabyasachi Mukharji, J.1. The following question has been referred to this court under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 :' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the amounts of Rs. 26,574 relating to rights and other expenses and Rs. 7,492 relating to bank commission and bank guarantee with regard to re-export of goods could not be allowed as deductible revenue expenses '2. The assessment year under reference is 1967-68, for which the relevant accounting year was the year ending 31st July, 1966. The assessee carried on the business of manufacture of iron and steel rounds, bars, etc., and was one of the importers of sheets having head office in Calcutta and branches at Kumhari and Raipur, In the profit and lossaccount, the assessee claimed a sure of Rs. 26,574 with reference to freight and other expenses and expenses of Rs. 7,492 relating to bank commission and bank guarantee with regard to re-export of goods. The Inc...
Commissioner of Income-tax, Central Vs. Indo-burma Petroleum Co. Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-01-1978
Reported in: [1978]112ITR755(Cal)
Sabyasachi Mukharji, J.1. The assessee is a private limited company and carries on business in petroleum. This reference under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, arises in respect of the assessment year 1964-65, for which the relevant accounting year is the calendar year 1963During the accounting year relevant to the assessment year, the assessee had incurred an expenditure of Rs. 11,200 on the driveways and the compound walls and had treated the same as building or plant and had claimed depreciation thereon. The Income-tax Officer disallowed the claim on the ground that these, viz., driveways and the compound walls, could neither be treated as building nor plant nor machinery. The assessee preferred an appeal before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner against the said decision of the Income-tax Officer. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner, however, negatived the assessee's claim and upheld the order of the Income-tax Officer. Being aggrieved by the order of the Appellate As...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Champlal Jain
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-01-1978
Reported in: [1978]112ITR809(Cal)
Sabyasachi Mukharji, J.1. The question involved in this case relates to penalty for the assessment year 1963-64. It appears that the assessee returned a total income of Rs. 11,084 for the said assessment year. The return was filed on the 15th September, 1964. The Income-tax Officer completed the assessment for the assessment year on an income of Rs. 1,33,192. As the total income returned by the assessee was less than 80 per cent, of the total income on which he was assessed, the Income-tax Officer initiated penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. As the minimum penalty leviable was more than Rs. 1,000 he referred the case to the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner for taking further action in this matter. The Inspecting Assistant Commissioner issued notice under Section 274(2} of the Income-tax Act, 1961, to the assessee to show cause why penalty should not be imposed upon him for failure to disclose the correct particulars of his income in his return. In...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›