Kolkata Court April 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.
Hind Wire Industries Ltd. Vs. Additional Commissioner, Commercial Taxe ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-04-1978
Reported in: [1978]42STC220(Cal)
Dipak Kumar Sen, J.1. Under Section 21(1) of the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act), the West Bengal Commercial Taxes Tribunal has drawn up a statement of case and has referred the following questions:(1) Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the deduction claimed under Section 5(2)(a)(ii) of the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941, for sales to the registered dealers, namely, M/s. Reliance Supply Agency and Bharati Distributors, aggregating to Rs. 1,16,425 should have been allowed ?(2) Whether or not upon a true and correct interpretation of Clause (iv) of Section 14 of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, 'wire' and 'wire-nails' should be considered as goods of special importance within the meaning of that section ?2. The facts found and/or admitted in the proceedings below are shortly as follows : M/s. Hind Wire Industries, the assessee, is a manufacturer of wire and wire-nail. In respect of sales tax assessment for the year en...
Smt. Jagat Janani Debi Vs. Smt. Jyotsna Basu
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-03-1978
Reported in: AIR1978Cal392
ORDERJyotirmoyee Nag, J. 1. Along with the Rule, there is an application Under Section 5 of the Limitation Act in respect of the instant revisional application. By an order dated 8-4-75, P. K. Banerjee, J. when issuing the Rule directed that the application for condonation of delay be considered at the time of hearing of the Rule. In that application in paras 4 and 5 an explanation has been given by the petitioner why the revisional application could not be filed in time. I am satisfied with the explanation given and accordingly I condone the delay and I take up the matter (the revisional application) for hearing.2. This revisional application is made against the judgment and order dated 10th Dec. 1974 passed by Sri S. K. Biswas, Additional District Judge, 2nd Court, Howrah, passed in Misc. Appeal No. 39 of 1974 reversing the order made in Misc. Case No. 41 of 1971 by the learned Munsif, 1st Court, Howrah. The petitioner filed a Title Suit, being Title Suit No. 140 of 1967 for dissolut...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Ananda Bazar Patrika P. Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-03-1978
Reported in: [1979]116ITR416(Cal)
Banerji, J.1. This reference under Section 66(1) of the Indian I.T. Act, 1922, arises out of the income-tax assessment of Ananda Bazar Patrika Private Ltd., the assessee, for the assessment year 1953-54, the relevant previous year being the calendar year 1952. 2. The assessee is engaged in the publication and sale of various newspapers and periodicals. The ITO computed the taxable income as follows : Loss of Rs. 4,951 under the head 'Business' ; income of Rs. 31,335 under the head 'Income from property' and an income of Rs. 1,85,963 under the head 'Other sources'. The last item was arrived at by including a sum of Rs. 1,63,000 from a credit of Rs. 2,50,000 standing in the account of Sarala Bala Sarkar, the grandmother of the managing director of the assessee, which the ITO treated as the assessee's income from undisclosed sources. 3. On appeal, the AAC, on the basis of certain data relating to circulation figures of the publications of the assessee as supplied to the Audit Bureau of Ci...
Oil India Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax (Central)
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-03-1978
Reported in: [1978]114ITR323(Cal)
Deb, J.1. This is a, reference under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and the question before us is as follows:'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that no depreciation was admissible on drains, culverts, roads, etc. ?'2. The statement of the case relates to the assessment years 1965-66 and 1966-67. The assessee is a company. It claimed depreciation on the actual, cost of construction of drains, culverts, roads, etc. The Income-tax Officer disallowed the claim on the ground that the expenditure incurred on construction of these assets did not bring into existence assets eligible for allowance of depreciation.3. The assessee filed appeals. As the drains, culverts, roads, etc., were constructed outside the plinth of the bungalows and were spread over in a big area, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner did not accept the contention made on behalf of the assessee that these assets were integral parts of the bungalows. Sin...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›