Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1978Cal472
Hazra, J. 1. The appellant, Metal Press Works Limited (hereinafter referred to as the tenant) has filed this appeal on July 25, 1966 from the decree dated June 9, 1966 passed by A. N. Ray, J. in favour of the respondent J. K. & Sons (hereinafter referred to as the landlord) in a suit for possession of portion of premises No. 165, Lower Chitpur Road, Calcutta (hereinafter referred to as the premises) and for mesne profits. The facts and circumstances relating to this appeal are briefly as follows : 2. In August 1959, by an agreement in writing the landlord agreed to let out the premises from Aug. 1, 1959 to the tenant at a total monthly rent of Rs. 900/-inclusive of owners' and occupiers' share of muncipal taxes, but exclusive of electric light and fan charges which the tenant agreed to bear. The agreement provided that the tenant shall pay to the landlord the total rent of Rs. 900/- within 15th day of each and every calendar month for the month immediately preceding. By the agreement, ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : [1980]124ITR147(Cal)
Dipak Kumar Sen, J.1. M/s. Singhal Brothers Private Ltd., the asses-see, is a private limited company. It was incorporated in 1939 under the Indian Companies Act, 1913. Till 1967, it was carrying on business of manufacture and sale of edible oils and owned a factory and godowns at Ghaziabad in U.P. 2. In 1967, the directors of the assessee decided to discontinue manufacture and to cease all ancillary business operations. The only income of the assessee thereafter was rent derived from letting out its godowns atGhaziabad. In the assessment years 1971-72 and 1972-73, the corresponding previous years ending on the 31st March of 1970 and 1971, the assessee claimed exemption under s. 10(29) of the I.T. Act, 1961, in respect of its rental income as aforesaid. The ITO rejected the claim on the ground that the assessee had not been constituted under any specific enactment for marketing of commodities. 3. Being aggrieved, the assessee preferred appeals to the AAC who upheld the decision of the ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : [1978]115ITR272(Cal)
Banerji, J.1. This reference under Section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, is at the instance of S. M. Basu and others, the heirs and legal representatives of C. C. Basu, deceased. The assessment year is 1958-59, for which the relevant accounting year is the calendar year 1957. The Tribunal has drawn up a statement of the case and has referred the following question to this court:'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in holding that the assessee was not entitled to the relief under Section 25(3) and/or Section 25{4) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, for the assessment year 1958-59 ?'2. The facts found and/or admitted are shortly as follows :C. C. Basu, a well-known solicitor of this court, died on the 9th December, 1967. He was a partner in the firm of Messrs. C. C. Basu & Co., Solicitors, having four annas share therein. The deceased had income from his share in the said firm which was assessed as his professional income. The...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : (1978)IILLJ521Cal
Sabyasachi Mukharji, J.1. This is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution challenging an order dated the 16th November, 1977, passed by the Special Officer and Ex-officio Deputy Secretary, Labour Department, Government of West Bengal.2. In order to appreciate the challenge it would be necessary to advert to certain facts. The petitioner No. 1 is a company and carries on business, inter alia, in the manufacture and sale of cast iron spun pipes, steel castings and grinding media and for its said business the said petitioner owns and operates two factories which are known as Spun Pipe Works and Steel Foundry Works at Barrackpore Trunk Road, 24-Parganas, West Bengal. The company employs 287 workmen in Spun Pipe Works and 442 workmen in the Steel Foundry Works, The company also employs 39 and 77 non-workmen start respectively in the said two factories. The cast iron spun pipes manufactured by the petitioner-company are used for water supply and sewerage schemes. All water suppl...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : 1978CriLJ1164
ORDERJyotirmoyee Nag, J.1. This Rule is directed against an order Under Section 146 Cr. P.C. passed by the learned Sub-divisional Magistrate of Bankura Sadar (North) attaching the disputed land after drawing up a proceeding Under Section 145 Cr. P.C. By that order the learned Sub-divisional Magistrate directed the parties to appear before him on the next date and file written statements in support of their respective claims regarding possession. Against this order of the learned Sub-divisional Magistrate, the second party petitioner went up before the Sessions Judge, Bankura in revision being Criminal Motion No. 30 of 1977. The point that was taken before the learned Sessions Judge was that the learned Magistrate had no jurisdiction to enquire about the possession of the parties relating to the subject-matter of the dispute after the same had been attached by him, Under Section 146 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, and accordingly his direction for filing written statements is illegal...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : [1978]115ITR688(Cal)
Sen, J. 1. At the instance of the Commissioner of Income-tax, West Bengal IV, Calcutta, this court has directed the Tribunal under Section 66(2) of the Indian I.T. Act, 1922, to draw up a statement of case and refer the following question :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and on aproper construction of Section 10(4A) of the Indian I.T. Act, 1922, the paymentof Rs. 1,00,777 to Shri M. M. Thapar by way of salary and profit commission was excessive or unreasonable so as to justify the disallowance of aportion thereof ?'2. The facts found and/or admitted in these proceedings are shortly asfollows: Messrs. Karam Chand Thapar & Bros. (P.) Ltd., Calcutta, theassessee, is a private limited company. In the assessment year 1961-62,the relevant previous year being the one ended on the 31st March, 1961,Rs. 1,00,777 paid to M. M. Thapar, son of late Karamchand Thapar, byway of remuneration consisting of salary, allowance and share of profits,came up for consideration duri...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1979Cal97
B.N. Maitra, J.1. The plaintiffs' case is that the disputed land along with the structures belonged to one Chamundi Charan Mukherjee. He died leaving his widow, Lakshimoni Debi and son, Bis-wanath Mukherjee. On the 15th of June 1938, Biswanath sold only the structure to one Sakhibala Dassi for Rs. 700/ by a registered kobala. On the same date he granted a lease of the land for 20 years at a monthly rental of Rs. 14/- with an pption to renew for S years more. Thereafter Sakhibala made herself scarce resulting in a presumption of death by the efflux of the statutory period, The plaintiff is the heir by her only daughter. The defendant purchased the property from Biswanath and obtained an order from the Thika Controller for re-entry against one Monimala Dassi. Then the present plaintiff instituted the Title Suit No. 197 of 1963 in the City Civil Court at Calcutta, for declaration of her tenancy right of the suit land and for injunction. That suit was decreed. Then the defendant filed the ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : [1979]116ITR425(Cal)
Dipak Kumar Sen, J.1. The facts found and/or admitted in this reference are of a short compass. Betts Hartley Huett & Co. Ltd., the asses-see, is a non-resident company with its head office in London. The assessee's business in Calcutta is mainly that of purchasing tea for its constituents abroad. In the assessment year 1963-64, the relevant previous year ending on the 31st December, 1963, the ITO found that the assessee had charged from its constituents in respect of tea purchased actual cost, commission or brokerage and also a sum of 10 paise per pound of tea on account of shipping, sampling and other miscellaneous charges, the commission charged varying between 1% and 2% on the value of the tea. In respect of despatch to head office the assessee did not charge any commission but charged all other items of expenses. The assessee contended that the sales to its head office were effected on a principal to principal basis and, therefore, there was no profit assessable under Section 9(1)...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1978Cal477
B.C. Basak, J.1. This appeal under Section 72 of the Copyright Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act) is directed against an order of the Copyright Board constituted under the said Act (hereinafter referred to as the Board) passed under Section 35 of the said Act. The facts of this case are shortly as follows:The Performing Right Society Ltd., London, the respondent No. 1, herein, is a Performing Right Society within the meaning of the said Act (hereinafter referred to as the Society). The Society is an association of Composers, authors and publishers of Music having its Head Office in London. On the 13th of Feb. 1971 an advertisement was published in the Gazette of India dated 13th of Feb. 1971 the relevant portion of which is to the following effect. 'Tariffs For India The following is notified for general information :-- Revision of Tariff. The Performing Right Society's Tariff (Statement of Fees, Charges or Royalties) relating to item No. 2 (Cinema) has been revised. ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1978Cal505
ORDERSudhamay Basu, J. 1. This Rule was obtained against an order dated the 20th of March, 1976 passed by the Munsif, 1st Court at Alipore in Misc. Case No. 24 of 71 arising out of S.C.C. Suit No. 115 of 63.2. The petitioner instituted a suit (No. 115 of 63) at the S.C.C. Court at Alipore against one Manindra Nath Banerjee, since deceased, who was predecessor-in-interest of the opposite parties 1 to 5 and two others as pro forma defendants for recovery of rent in respect of premises No. 303, Diamond Harbour Road. A written statement was filed by the said Manindra Nath Banerjee who alleged that he was a tenant of the land and not of the structure and that his tenancy was governed by the West Bengal Non-agricultural Tenancy Act. The suit was decreed in favour of the petitioner against which a rule was obtained from this High Court being Civil Rule No. 1290 of 1965. On the 8th of July, 1969 the case was sent back on remand for further hearing to the S.C.C. Court. The records were received...
Tag this Judgment!