Kolkata Court May 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.
Kali Mohan Das (Senior) Vs. Kali Mohan Das (Junior)
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-03-1978
Reported in: 1978CriLJ950
ORDERJyotimoyee Nag, J.1. This Rule is directed against order passed by the learned Executive Magistrate Under Section 145 of the Cr.PC on 8-6-1977 rejecting an application by the petitioner for making a reference Under Section 21(3) of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act. The petitioner who is the second party in the proceeding before the learned Magistrate in M. P. Case No. 43 of 1976 contended that since a question has been raised toy the second party regarding his status as a bargadar before the learned Magistrate, the learned Magistrate should refer the matter under the provision of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act for a decision as to that status of the petitioner Under Section 21(3) of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act. The learned Magistrate came to the conclusion that for the purpose of deciding the present proceeding before him he is not deciding the question of bargadarship of the opposite party but he has to decide as to who is in immediate possession of the disputed property.2...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. New Gujarat Cotton Mills Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-02-1978
Reported in: [1979]117ITR889(Cal)
Sen, J. 1. The facts found and/or admitted in these proceedings are as follows:In the assessment year 1961-62, the corresponding previous year ending on the 30th September, 1960, the total income of M/s. New Gujarat Cotton Mills Ltd. was assessed at Rs. 4,34,618. The income-tax levied thereon was Rs. 1,91,069 leaving a surplus of Rs. 2,43,549. The assessee was held to be a company in which the public was not substantially interested and, therefore, it was required under Section23A of the Indian I.T. Act, 1922, to distribute 50% of the surplus by way of dividend, i.e., a sum of Rs. 1,21,774. The assessee, in fact, declared a dividend of Rs. 90,000, leaving a sum of Rs. 31,774 undistributed.2. The assessee contended that its commercially distributable profit was only Rs. 60,870, which was computed by taking into account the loss brought forward, depreciation and development rebate. The ITO did not accept the computation of the assessee and held that of the depreciation of Rs. 7,95,482, o...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›