Kolkata Court March 1979 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.
indo Burma Forest Syndicate Vs. Nitai Charan Haldar
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-12-1979
Reported in: AIR1979Cal219
M.M. Dutt, J.1. The petitioner in this Rule, has challenged the propriety of the Order dated August 30, 1975 of the 12th Court of the Additional District Judge, Ali-pore affirming the order of the Thika Controller, Calcutta, holding that as the land comprised in the tenancy of the opposite party belongs to the Government, the Calcutta Thika Tenancy Act, 1949 does not apply in view of Clause (a) of Section 30 of the said Act.2. The petitioner, who is the landlord of the opposite party, the thika tenant, brought a proceeding under Section 9 (2) of the Calcutta Thika Tenancy Act, 1949 praying for entering on the holding, inter alia, alleging that the opposite party, the thika tenant, had voluntarily abandoned his holding without notice to the petitioner and without arranging for payment of rent as it fell due. The opposite party entered appearance in the proceeding and contested the same by filing a written objection. The principal defence of the opposite party was that as the land compri...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Chhyabani (P.) Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-09-1979
Reported in: [1980]121ITR644(Cal)
C.K. Banerji, J.1. This reference under Section 256(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961, arises out of the I.T. assessment of Chhyabani (P.) Ltd., Calcutta, theassessee, for the assessment year 1962-63, the previous year relevant thereto ending on the 31st December, 1961.2. In the course of assessment the ITO found cash credits recorded in the books of account of the assessee in the following manner :Rs.(a)From K.B. Chatterjee on27-2-61.7,000(b)Loanaccount of J.N. Ganguly on5-1-61.10,000 16-2-61.12,000 3-3-61.12,500 4-4-61.3,500 38,000Withdrawnon14-6-61.12,000 29-9-61..Depositedon31-10-61.9,500 5-12-61.8,500 31-12-61.. Balance.22,0003. Save for Rs. 9,500 deposited on the 31st October, 1961, the assessee failed to explain the other cash credits and the ITO added the same as income from undisclosed sources.4. Being aggrieved the assessee appealed to the AAC who confirmed the order of the ITO. On further appeal before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, the assessee asserted the genuineness of the s...
Commissioner of Income-tax (Central) Vs. Coochbehar Trading Co. Pvt. L ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-09-1979
Reported in: [1979]120ITR535(Cal)
C.K. Banerji, J.1. This reference under Section 66(1) of the Indian I.T. Act, 1922, at the instance of the Commissioner of Income-tax, (Central), Calcutta, arises out of proceedings under Section 23A of the Indian I.T. Act, 1922, initiated against Coochbehar Trading Co. (Private) Ltd., the assessee, in respect of the assessment years 1959-60, 1960-61 and 1961-62, for which the relevant previous years are the calendar years 1958, 1959 and 1960, respectively. 2. The facts found and/or admitted are shortly as follows : 3. The assessee being a company in which public are not substantially interested came within the mischief of the provisions of Section 23A of the Indian I.T. Act, 1922. 4. In the previous years relevant to the said assessment years the assessee had earned income from shares in other companies held by it and from interest on deposits made out of its surplus funds with Messrs. Soorajmull Nagarmull and Howrah Trading Co. (P.) Ltd. its allied concerns. Out of its distributable ...
Haripada Das Vs. Sristidhar Chakraborty
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-08-1979
Reported in: AIR1979Cal221
ORDERJyotirmoyee Nag, J.1. This Rule is directed against Order No. 122 dated 4-7-1978 passed by the learned Munsif in Title Suit No. 65 of 1975. The said Title Suit was filed for eviction by the petitioner on 28-2-1975 praying for eviction of the opposite party in respect of two rooms including a joint privy of premises No. 88, Debendra Ganguly Road, P. S. Shibpur, District Howrah. That suit was filed on the ground of default in payment of rent and the same ground was made out in the notice to quit given by the petitioner on 3-12-1974. The petitioner is the landlord, purchaser from the previous landlord and accordingly though he had wanted the premises for his own use and occupation but on account of the bar under Section 13 (3A) of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act that ground was not stated in the notice nor was the suit filed on that ground. In February 1978 however, the three years' period having expired the petitioner filed an application under Order 6, Rule 17 of the Civil P. ...
A. Tosh and Sons (P.) Ltd. Vs. Asst. Collector of Customs and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-08-1979
Reported in: AIR1979Cal386
ORDERB.C. Basak, J. 1. In this application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the petitioner is praying for a Writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to allow shipment of teas as per the shipping bill serial No. 2723 dated 11th April, 1975 and the connected invoice by the steamer which will be ready on 16th June 1975 at the Calcutta Port and/or by such other steamer that may be available for shipping teas to the said Port and also for a Writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the order dated 5th June 1975 passed by the respondent No. 1 and also the show-cause notice issued on 30th April 1975. 2. The case of the petitioner as made out in the petition is as follows:-- The petitioner is a limited company registered in Calcutta carrying on business in teas in India and abroad. The petitioner also acts as commission agents of foreign principals and is also an exporter of teas. The teas grown in various parts of West Bengal and Assam are sold in auctions in...
Sarajini Nag and ors. Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-06-1979
Reported in: [1980]45STC260(Cal)
Monoj Kumar Mukherjee, J.1. The plaintiffs brought the suit for declaration that a certificate issued under the Public Demands Recovery Act for realisation of sales tax dues from them was illegal, ultra vires and without jurisdiction and for setting aside and cancellation of the said certificate. The plaintiffs also prayed for an injunction restraining the respondent, the State of West Bengal, from executing such certificate for realisation of sales tax and/or dues for the year 1367 B.S. and for subsequent years.2. The case of the plaintiffs, in short, was that one Nityananda Nag, since deceased, used to run a sweetmeat shop under the name and style of 'Desh-bandhu Mistana Bhandar' in the town of Burdwan. Owing to his old age and various ailments, he closed down the business and duly intimated the commercial tax authorities the fact of such closure by surrendering his registration certificate being No. B.N. 597A. Thereafter, Nityananda trans--ferred the goodwill of the business by a de...
Calcutta Port Sramik Union Vs. Bengal River Transport Assn. Ltd. and o ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-06-1979
Reported in: (1979)IILLJ151Cal
Anil K. Sen, J.1. These are the two appeals under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent directed against the judgment and order dated April 4, 1978, reported in 1978 L.I.C. 1416 (Cal.) passed by A.K. Mookerji, J., allowing the two writ petitions--one by the Calcutta River Transport Assiciation and others and the other by Bengal River Transport Association and there by setting aside an award dated July 28, 1976, passed by Shri A.K. Moidu, Presiding Officer of the National Tribunal constituted by the Central Government under Section 7B of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, in a reference made by The said Government under Section 10(1A) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act). As the two writ petitions were heard analogously and had been disposed of by orders based on a common judgment now under challenge in the present two appeals before us, we have heard them together and we would dispose them as such. For deciding the points at issue and for appreciatin...
Shri Mahadeolal Khaitan and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-05-1979
Reported in: 1979CENCUS484D
ORDERPradyot Kumar Banerjee, J.1. This Rule is directed against an order of confiscation made by the Collector of Central Excise and Customs, West Bengal under Rule 126M of the Defence of India Rules, 1962 (Part XIIA Gold Control). It appears that a show cause notice was issued on 3rd April, 1968 under the Gold Control Rules framed under the Defence of India Rules. There was a search and seizure of the golds and gold ornaments etc. on 13th September, 1966 and 14th September, 1966 from the petitioner admittedly under the Customs Act, 1962. In the meantime, there was ex-parte order extending the time for issuing the show cause notice on 10th March, 1967, 10th May, 1967 and 2nd June, 1967 under the Customs Act, 1962. In pursuance of the show cause notice issued on 3rd April, 1968 under the Defence of India Rules (Gold Control--Part XIIA) the order of confiscation was made on 18th November, 1970. Thereupon the petitioner moved this Court and obtained the present rule without going in appea...
Rajkumar Agarwalla and anr. Vs. University of Calcutta
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-02-1979
Reported in: AIR1979Cal393
ORDERSabyasachi Mukharji, J. 1. These are two applications, one by one Raj Kumar Agarwalla and the other by Madan Murari Verma. These two petitioners were examinees appearing in the final LL. B. Examination held by the University of Calcutta. The said Examinations which were held in Vidyasagar Centre with which I am concerned in these two writ applications, were cancelled by the University. The cancellation is the subject matter of challenge in these two writ applications. The ground of cancellation by the University is that there was what has become unfortunately a familiar phase in the Indian educational system 'Mass Copying'. The expression 'Mass Copying' is neither an expression of art nor an expression of conveying any definite legal connotation but I suppose in the context it is used it is meant to convey to be understood where at an examination there is large scale copying by the examinees not necessarily copying by all or by any individual candidate, but copying by such a large...
inchek Tyre Limited Vs. Assistant Collector of Customs and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-02-1979
Reported in: 1979CENCUS360D,1979(4)ELT236(Cal)
Bimal Chandra Basak, J.1. This is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a writ in the nature of Certiorari for quashing the impugned orders passed being Annexures Cl, C2, D and E to the petition.2. The facts of this case are as follows : - The petitioner carries on business as manufacturer of Rubber tyres. In course of its business the petitioner has to import insoluble sculpture in bulk quantities which are required for the use in the manufacture of rubber tyres.According to the petitioner sulphur is exempted from the whole of the Customs duty leviable thereon under the Indian Tariff Act, 1934 by virtue of a notification, dated August 20, 1965.It is alleged, between November, 1969 and April, 1971, the petitioner imported a number of consignments of sulphur particulars whereof are given in the petition.3. It is alleged that the goods fall under Item 28(3) of the Indian Customs Tariff and as such same were exempted by virtue of the aforesaid notificat...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›