Kolkata Court July 1979 Judgments

Manindra Nath Ghosh Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.

Court: Kolkata

Bankim Chandra Ray, J.1. This appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent is directed against the judgment and order of M.N. Roy, J., made in Civil Rule No. 52(W) of 1974 discharging the Rule.2. The petitioner was an employee of the respondent No. 1 and was at the relevant time working as Chief Inspector, Food and Supplies at Bonga-on in the District of 24 Parganas. On May 4, 1978, the petitioner was served with a charge-sheet alleging inter alia:Charge No. 1: That while employed as Inspector, F. & S. Ranaghat, Nadia during the year 1959, you had been in possession of pecuniary assest to the extent of Rs. 10,700 which is disproportionate to the known sources of your income and which you failed to satisfactorily account for and may be presumed to have been acquired by you by corrupt means or otherwise obscuring (sic) your power as public servant.Charge No. 2: That while employed as Inspector, F. & S., Ranaghat, Nadia, you purchased and acquired a building at Sidnanlapara, Ranaghat (Vid...

Md. SerajuddIn and Bros. Vs. Income-tax Officer, A-ward and ors.

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: [1980]122ITR465(Cal)

Sankar Prasad Mitra, C.J.1. This is an appeal against a judgment delivered by A. N. Sen J., on July 24 and 25, 1975, dismissing an application under Article 226 of the Constitution. The petition under Article 226 was affirmed on behalf of the appellant by an affidavit of Mohammad Khaliloor Rahaman sworn on the 11th March, 1965. There were some amendments to the original petition and the amended petition, was reaffirmed by the same person on the 9th August, 1972.2. In the petition, five several notices dated the 4th December, 1964, under section 148 of the I.T. Act, 1961, for the assessment years 1955-56 to 1959-60 were challenged.3. It appears that the appellant's income for the assessment years 1953-54 and 1955-56 were assessed on an agreed basis at a flat rate of 9 per cent, on the total turnover of each year. The appellant is a registered partnership firm and carries on business, inter alia, in mining and export of manganese, chrome and other kinds of mineral ores.4. On December 23,...

income-tax Officer, 'A' Ward and Ors. Vs. Ashoke Glass Works

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: [1980]125ITR491(Cal)

ORDERNo. 2p 18/68-61-69(11) Dated, the 15th October, 1968.A new charge of Inspecting Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax tobe known as ' Range XXII, Calcutta ', is hereby created with headquarters at Calcutta. 2. In pursuance of Sub-section (1) of Section 123 of the I.T. Act, 1961 (43 of 1961), and in partial modification of the existing orders on the subject, I, Commissioner of Income-tax, West Bengal III, Calcutta, hereby direct that the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Range XXII, Calcutta, shall to the exclusion of all other Inspecting Assistant Commissioners of Income Tax, perform the functions of an Inspecting Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax in respect of persons or classes of persons or of incomes or classes of incomes or of the areas in respect of which the Income-tax Officers of, (a) Dist. Howrah (excluding B, C & F-Wards), and (b) Special Survey Circle IX, Calcutta (excluding D, E & F-Wards), perform their functions as Income-tax Officers. This order sha...

Dhanraj Chhajar Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: 1982(10)ELT963(Cal)

ORDERT.K. Basu, J.1. In this Rule the petitioner challenges the detention of two consignments of turmeric which, according to him, were brought from Nepal for export outside India. As is well known, Nepal is a land locked country. The Indian ports and in particular the port of Calcutta is used for the transit of these goods for the purpose of shipment to foreign countries.2. According to the petitioner on the 23rd April, 1978 he obtained an export licence issued by His Majesty's Government in Nepal for export of 20 metric tonnes of turmeric. On the the 7th July, 1978, 169 bags consisting of 70 Kg. each of turmeric crossed the Indo-Nepalese border at Joghani after complying with all the formalities and declaration. This consignment reached Kidderpore Dock on the 24th July, 1978.3. A similar export turmeric licence was issued for export of 4 metric tonnes of turmeric on the 11th July, 1978, on the 13th July, 1978, 44 bags crossed the border and reached Kidderpore Dock on the 8th November...

Arun Kumar Mukhopadhyay and ors. Vs. the Institute of Chartered Accoun ...

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: AIR1980Cal40

ORDERDipak Kumar Sen, J.1. Arun Kumar Mukhopadhyay, Samarendra Nath Pathak and Indra Nath Das, the petitioners in these proceedings are Chartered Accountants bv profession and they carry on such profession under the name and style of Messrs B. N. Mukherjee & Co., Messrs. N Pathak & Co. and Messrs I. N. Das & Co. respectively. The petitioners are registered members of the Institute of Chartered Accountants incorporated under the Chartered Accountants Act, 1949 (hereinafter referred to as the said Institute)2. under Section 9 of the Chartered Accountants Act, 1949 a council is constituted for discharging the functions as-signed to it under the said Act and also for the management of the affairs of the said Institute. Section 30 of the said Act confers to the Council the power of framing regulations under the Act subject to certain conditions as laid down in the said section.3. Regulation 32-B of such Regulations framed by the Council in exerciseof statutory power is sought to be impugned...

Sm. Nani Bala Saha and anr. Vs. Sm. Charu Bala Saha and anr.

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: AIR1979Cal308,(1979)2CompLJ71(Cal),83CWN844

M.M. Dutt, J.1. This appeal is at the instance of the defendants and it arises out of a suit for permanent and mandatory injunction.2. The plaintiff No. 1 is the wife and the plaintiff No. 2 Joykrishna Saha is her husband. The defendants Nos. 1 and 2 are respectively the widow and the son of one Subal Krishna Saha, since deceased, the elder brother of the plaintiff No. 2 Joykrishna Saha. There was an amicable partition of joint properties among Subal Krishna Saha, Joykrishna Saha and one Bibhuti Bhusan by a registered deed of partition dated June 2, 1954. The disputed house, which is a five storied one, situate at P-98, B. K. Pal Avenue, Calcutta was allotted to Subal Krishna Saha and Joykrishna Saha and the same was also partitioned between the said two brothers in accordance with a plan annexed to the said deed of partition and on terms and conditions mentioned therein. The house was divided into two portions.--Lot A and Lot B. Lot A, being the front portion, abutting on the B. K. Pa...

Octovious Steel and Co. Ltd. Vs. the Endogram Tea Co. Ltd.

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: AIR1980Cal78

ORDERPratibha Bonnerjea, J.1. This is an application by the defendant for issue of a commission to examine Mr. Alan Fulton Mac-Donald at No. 59 Penn Hill Avenue, Parkstone, Dorset in England. It is alleged in the petition that Mr. Mac-Donald was the Chairman of the defendant company from 1-1-76 to 30-12-77 and during his tenure of service he had written several letters which were relied on by both the parties in the present suit. It is further alleged that the witnesses of both the parties have referred to him several times. Mr MacDonald has retired from service and at present is not under the control of the petitioner. He is 54 years old and is a permanent resident of Britain and as such he cannot be compelled to come to India for giving evidence. In para 13 of the petition, it has been alleged that the petitioner had made all arrangements to bring Mr. MacDonald to India to give evidence in the suit. But in March 1979, when the petitioner's Director Mr. Pepperell requested Mr. MacDona...

Amitava Bhattacharya and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court: Kolkata

B.C. Basak, J.1. This application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is directed against certain actions taken by the respondent No. 3. The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as 'the respondent-company') in respect of recruitment of certain persons2. The facts of this case, so far as they are relevant for the purpose of disposal of this case, are as follows:The respondent No. 2, General Insurance Corporation of India, (hereinafter referred to as the respondent-Corporation) was formed as a Government company in accordance with the provisions of the Companies Act pursuant to Section 9 of the General Insurance Business Nationalisation Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as ('the said Act') . The respondent-Corporation was formed for the superintending, controlling and carrying on the business of general insurance. The respondent-company was incorporated under the appropriate Companies Act and before the said Act came into force was carrying on the business of...