Kolkata Court March 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.
Tara Devi Goenka Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-09-1978
Reported in: [1980]122ITR14(Cal)
Sudhindra Mohan Guha, J. 1. This reference arises in respect of the assessment year 1964-65 for which the relevant year was D.S.Y. 2020.2. In that year of assessment the assessee disclosed in her wealth-tax return jewellery worth Rs. 65,000. The ITO required the assessee to explain the source of the acquisition of the said jewellery. A month's time was sought for, but ultimately no explanation whatsoever was tendered by her. As a result, the ITO assessed the entire value of jewellery as her income from undisclosed sources.3. The assessee preferred an appeal to the AAC. It was contended before him that the addition was entirely presumptuous and was not supported by any evidence. It was further contended before him that the jewelleries were received at the time of the assessee's marriage from her grandfather, father and father-in-law. The AAC, after accepting that the assessee belonged to a rich family and she must have received some ornaments in her marriage and that it was difficult fo...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Katihar Jute Mills (P.) Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-09-1978
Reported in: [1979]116ITR781(Cal)
Sabyasachi Mukharji, J. 1. The assessee is a private limited company and was running a jute mill. Its accounting year is the calendar year. The relevant assessment year under consideration is the assessment year 1962-63. On 31st December, 1958, the company had a paid up share capital of Rs. 12,15,000. The profit and loss account balance at debit was Rs. 12,05,087. The company was thus very badly off. In the directors'report dated 8th August, 1959, accompanying the account for 31st August,1958. after refering to the unsatisfactory financial position and circumstances under which the company was placed, it was stated that 'faced with such a discouraging position your directors decided to close down the factory'. It appears that at about that time, there was a dispute pending before the Industrial Tribunal for adjudication. The company had issued a notice of closure on the 2nd August, 1958, which led to the said industrial dispute. On the 6th July, 1959, there was an agreement under which...
V.G. Ghawda Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-08-1978
Reported in: AIR1978Cal271
ORDERS.K. Roy Choudhury, J.1. This is an application under Section 8 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 for appointment of an Arbitrator by the Court in place and stead of an Arbitrator who has resigned.2. The facts shortly are that the petitioner entered into a construction contract with the respondent dated the 26th of June, 1958, for the construction of a new railway line on the terms and conditions mentioned in the said agreement. The said agreement contained an arbitration clause in the general conditions of contract which was incorporated in the said contract between the parties. The said clauses are Clause. 62 and 63. As disputes and differences arose in terms of the said contract and the petitioner demanded reference to arbitration of the disputes in terms of the arbitration clause on or about 31st of March 1973, and as the respondent failed to refer the disputes to arbitration an application under Section 20 of the Arbitration Act, 1940, was made before this Court by the petitioner ...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Lalit Trading Corporation
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-08-1978
Reported in: [1980]125ITR586(Cal)
Sabyasachi Mukharji, J. 1. The assessee is M/s. Lalit Trading Corporation. It was claimed to be a partnership irm constituted of Smt. Indira Rani Poddar and Smt. Sarada Devi Poddar, being the two major partners, and three minors who had been shown to have been admitted to the benefits of the partnership. The two major partners are related as mother-in law and daughter-in-law whereas the three minors are grandsons of Smt. Indira Rani Poddar. The firm was said to have been constituted by an instrument of partnership dated 27th April, 1957, with effect from 1st January, 1957. The assessment year involved in this reference is 1959-60, for which the relevant accounting year is the year commencing from 27th July, 1957, and ending on 30th June, 1958. For the immediately preceding assessment year, viz., the assessment year 1958-59, which was the first year of assessment, the assessee had filed an application for registration under Section 26A of the Indian I.T. Act, 1922, on the 27th June, 195...
Reliance Jute and Industries Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-08-1978
Reported in: [1981]127ITR842(Cal)
Sabyasachi Mukharji, J. 1. In this reference under Section 256(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961, for the assessment year 1967-68, we are concerned with only one question, namely :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that no appeal lay before the AAC as the only point involved therein related to interest under Section 214 ?'2. The ITO made provisional assessment under Section 141A on 3rd January, 1969, determining the excess advance tax refundable at Rs. 9,80,858. This order was rectified on February 26, 1969, and a further refund of interest of Rs. 1,40,260 under Section 214 was allowed to the assessee. On March 30, 1972, the ITO made an assessment under Section 143(3) computing the total tax payable at a figure of Rs. 79,506 which was adjusted against the refund due for the assessment year 1961-62.3. The matter went up in appeal before the AAC, who gave some reliefs to the assessee. On December 29, 1972, the ITO gave effect to the ...
Bhagirath Kanoria Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax (Central)
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-08-1978
Reported in: [1980]122ITR728(Cal)
Sabyasachi Mukharji, J.1. For the three assessment years under reference, 1955-56, 1956-57 and 1961-62, the original assessments were made by the Income-tax Officer, under section 23(3) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922. Later, the ITO reopened the assessments and brought to tax certain amounts on the ground that the amounts had escaped assessment under the original assessments. The amounts thus brought to tax were Rs. 7,700 for the assessment year 1955-56, Rs. 38,500 for the assessment year 1956-57 and Rs. 7,000 for the assessment year 1961-62. These amounts brought to tax were said to be dividend income of the assessee in respect of 15,400 equity shares of M/s. Jute Carriers (P.) Ltd. standing in the names of 12 persons. As per the settlement with the department in the year 1964-65, the assessee agreed that those 15,400 shares standing in the names of 12 persons might be treated as his shares for the purpose of assessment in its hands of the money invested for the purchase of those ...
Commissioner of Income-tax (Central) Vs. B.P. (India) Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-08-1978
Reported in: [1979]116ITR440(Cal)
Sabyasachi Mukharji, J. 1. This reference arises out of the proceedings for the assessment years 1962-63 and 1963-64, the corresponding previous years having ended on 31st December, 1961, and 28th February, 1962, respectively. The income-tax assessments were completed under Section 143(3) of the I.T. Act, 1961, on a total income of Rs. 58,47,380 and Rs. 31,13,458 on 22nd February, 1964, and 23rd March, 1964, for the two assessment years respectively. The assessee had discontinued its business in India on 28th February, 1962, and had filed a claim under Section 25(3) of the Indian I.T. Act, 1922, on 27th March, 1962. In the said claim, it was stated by the assessee as under :'With reference to our letter dated 12th March, 1962, and in accordance with the provisions of the above Section whereby no income-tax and super-tax shall be payable by us in respect of the income, profits or gains for the period between the end of the previous year and 28th February, 1962, by virtue of our business...
Grindlays Bank Ltd. Vs. Income-tax Officer, h Ward and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-08-1978
Reported in: [1979]116ITR710(Cal)
Tarun Kumar Basu, J.1. In these two writ applications the petitioner, Messrs. Grindlays Bank Ltd. challenged certain notices issued under Section 148 of the I.T. Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). In Civil Rule No. 15774(w) of 1975, the petitioner has challenged notices under Section 148 of the Act in respect of the assessment years 1958-59, 1966-67, 1967-68, 1968-69, 1969-70 and 1970-71.2. In Civil Rule No. 8747(w) of 1976, the petitioner has challenged notices under Section 148 of the Act in respect of the assessment years 1959-60, 1960-61, 1961-62, 1962-63, 1963-64, 1964-65 and 1965-66.3. As almost identical questions of fact and law arise in both these civil rules by consent of parties, the two rules were heard together and one set of arguments were advanced in both.4. Although the reasons recorded by the ITO justifying the reopening of the assessment for the above-mentioned years were not set out either in the affidavit-in-opposition filed on behalf of the revenue o...
Balai Kumar Sarkar Vs. Bimal Chandra Sarkar and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-07-1978
Reported in: AIR1978Cal340,82CWN689
M.M. Dutt, J.1. This Rule is at the instance of the defendant No. 1 and it is directed against Order No. 2 dated Feb. 16, 1977 of the Subordinate Judge, 4th Court, Alipore. The suit out of which this Rule arises has been instituted by the plaintiff-opposite party No. 1 against the petitioner and others for the recovery of the sum of Rs. 38,951.10. The opposite party No. 1 filed an application under Order 38, Rule 5 of the Civil P. C. for attachment before judgment, inter alia, alleging therein that the defendants were avoiding payment of the plaintiff's dues and with intent to obstruct or delay the execution of the decree that would be passed in the suit against the defendants, they were about to dispose of their assets and had removed and/or had been removing their property from the local limits of the jurisdiction of the Court. Further, it was alleged that the defendants were trying to receive payment of the money from the Additional Chief Engineer, Bandel Thermal Power Station payab...
Wire Machinery Manufacturing Corporation Ltd. and ors. Vs. State and a ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-07-1978
Reported in: [1979]49CompCas197(Cal),1978CriLJ839
P.C. Borooah, J. 1. The petitioners in all these rules are being prosecuted in the court of the Metropolitan Magistrate, 7th Court, Calcutta, under the provisions of Sections 14(1A), 14(2), 14A(1) and 14AA of the Employees' Provident Funds and Family Pension Fund Act, 1952, read with para, 76(b) of the Employees' Provident Funds Scheme (hereinafter ' the Act and the Scheme ') on the basis of complaints filed by the provident fund inspector, West Bengal.2. The common question of law which arises in all these rules is whether a complaint can be lodged and cognizance taken after a period of one year from the date of the alleged contravention of the aforesaid provisions of the Act and the Scheme ?3. According to the complaints the first petitioner along with petitioner Nos. 2, 3 and 4 who are its directors had not paid the employer's and employees' share of the contributions and administrative charges for the different months which are the subject-matter of the cases started against them.4...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »