Kolkata Court July 1980 Judgments
Adi Bapuji Rabadi Vs. Saradindu Banerjee
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-31-1980
Reported in: AIR1981Cal3
ORDERPadma Khastgir, J. 1. This application has been taken out by the defendant for dismissal of the suit on the ground that the suit filed by the plaintiff is barred by the law of limitation.2. The present suit has been filed by the plaintiff Adi Bapuji Rabadi against Saradindu Banerjee, also known as Shute Banerjee, for damages suffered by the plaintiff due to malicious prosecution launched by the defendant. The facts of this case, shortly, are that the 'Shute Banerjee Benefit Cricket Match' was held for the benefit of the defendant Saradindu Banerjee. After such Benefit Cricket Match was held, it was the case of the defendant, there was misappropriation of funds from the sale proceeds of the said match and the defendant lodged a First Information Report with the Hastings police station for criminal breach of trust committed by the plaintiff in respect of the said Benefit Cricket Match sale proceeds. Thereafter the Hastings police station conducted investigation and initiated crimina...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Surendra Overseas Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-30-1980
Reported in: (1980)19CTR(Cal)72,[1982]136ITR553(Cal)
Sabyasachi Mukharji, J. 1. In this reference under Section 256(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961, the following question is raised : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the sum of Rs. 18,224 received by the assessee could not constitute income of the assessee for the assessment year 1962-63 ?' 2. The relevant facts for answering this question as found by the Tribunal are as follows: 'In these grounds, the decision of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner upholding the disallowance made by the Income-tax Officer on an amount of Rs. 18,224 collected as 'general average' by the assessee is contested. One of the ships belonging to the assessee, i.e., APJ Ambar, on voyage from Madras to Calcutta in May, 1961, experienced serious engine trouble resulting in a complete breakdown. The ship was thereafter towed to Calcutta and it discharged its cargo on the 6th June, 1961. In respect of the cargo a 'general average' was declared. The consign...
Tag this Judgment!Monoranjan Mukherjee Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-30-1980
Reported in: (1980)19CTR(Cal)74,[1981]132ITR712(Cal)
Sudhindra Mohan Guha, J. 1. This reference under Section 256(1) of the I.T. 1961, is at the instance of the assessee.2. The assessee filed a return on February 16, 1968, for the assessment year 1966-67, showing an income of Rs. 15,944. The ITO completed the assessment on December 31, 1970, on a total income of Rs. 68,525 which was inclusive of Rs. 38,464 added as income from undisclosed sources. The addition of Rs. 38,464 was made on the basis that the sum of Rs. 38,464 credited in the assessee's books of account as proceeds realised by the sale of goods, in fact, represented the assessee's income from undisclosed sources. With reference to the above addition and some other additions made in the assessment, the ITO initiated penalty proceedings against the assessee and referred the matter to the IAC for further action. In the appeal preferred by the assessee, the AAC reduced the aforementioned addition of Rs. 38,464 to Rs. 31,464. The impugned order of penalty was passed by the IAC aft...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax, Central-ii Vs. Schrader Scovill Duncan Ltd ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-30-1980
Reported in: [1981]132ITR822(Cal)
Sabyasachi Mukharji, J.1. The question posed for our consideration in this reference under Section 256(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961, are as follows :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the income, profits and gains of a company not includible in its total income referred to in Rule 4 of the Second Schedule of the Companies (Profits) Surtax Act, 1964, applied only to those amounts, which are not includible in the total income by the provisions of Chapter III of the Income-tax Act, and not to any of the deductions claimable under Chapter VIA of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that there was no error in the order of the Income-tax Officer in not reducing the capital computed proportionately having regard to the deductions allowed under Sections 80-I and 80J of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and in that view cancelling the order of the Co...
Tag this Judgment!United Commercial Bank Vs. Sanatan Bastushilpa Pratisthan Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-29-1980
Reported in: AIR1981Cal146
ORDERC.K. Banerji, J.1. This is an application by the defendant Sanatan Bastushilpa Pratisthan for revocation of leave under Clause 12 of theLetters Patent, stay of the suit and all proceedings therein and for revocation of the leave under Order II, Rule 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure.2. The defendant is the owner of premises No. 121/1, Netaji Subhas Ch. Eose Road, Tollygunge, and has constructed a multistoried building therein named 'Regent Towers' consisting of ground floor and nine upper floors comprising of seventy two flats. By an agreement dated October 10, 1979 the plaintiff agreed to buy and the defendant agreed to sell six two-bed-roomed fiats and six three-bed-roomed flats having distinctive numbers situate on various floors of the said building at or for a total price of Rs. 13,45,200/-, on the terms and conditions contained in the said agreement which was executed at 10, Brabourne Road, Calcutta within the jurisdiction of this Court.3. Pursuant to and in terms of the said...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Prakash Chandra (P.) Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-29-1980
Reported in: [1981]127ITR241(Cal)
Sabyasachi Mukharji, J. 1. This reference arises out of the assessment year 1962-63 for which the relevant previous year ended on 31st March, 1962. The assessee derived its income from contract business. It entered into a financial agreement with M/s. Cine Films (Private) Ltd. on the 19th December, 1958, for a period of five years and advanced a sum of Rs. 2 lakhs. The agreement was also put in writing on the same date. It would be appropriate, in view of the contentions raised, to refer to the relevant portion of the said agreement. The said agreement, inter alia, stated as follows :' (3) That in consideration of the financial accommodation given and/ or in lieu of interest for the advance the lender shall be entitled to fifty per cent. of the net profit of the borrower company to be determined in the following manner : (4) That the net profit mentioned above shall mean the amount of the net profit as per the annual audited profit and loss account of the company subject to the followi...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Swaranalatika Sarkar Vs. Smt. Prativa Rani Sarkar
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-28-1980
Reported in: AIR1981Cal79
ORDERArun Kumar Janah, J. 1. This Rule is directed against Order No. 24 dated May 28, 1977 and Order No. 25 dated May 31, 1977 passed in Title Execution Case No. 9 of 1976 by the Munsif, Second Court, Bunkura allowing an application for amendment of the plaint filed by the opposite party. The facts relating to this case arc as follows :The opposite party institued a suit against the petitioner for specific performance of a contract for sale dated July 23, 1966. But she made no prayer for recovery of possession for the said property. The suit was filed on October 2, 1966 and it was dismissed by the trial court on February 29. 1968. On appeal the lower appellate Court decreed the suit on March 12. 1970. Thereafter the petitioner preferred a second appeal to this Court which was dismissed under Order 41, Rule 11 of the C. P. Code on February 4, 1972. The petitioner filed an application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court and the same Wits rejected on September 7, 1973. The petitioner...
Tag this Judgment!S.P. Agarwalla Alias Sukhdeo Prasad Agarwalla Vs. Income-tax Officer, ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-28-1980
Reported in: [1983]140ITR1010(Cal)
M.M. Dutt, J.1. In this appeal, the appellant, S. P. Agarwalla, carrying on a business under the name and style of M/s. S. P. Agarwalla & Co., has challenged the propriety of the judgment of a learned single judge of this court discharging the rule nisi obtained by the appellant on his application under Article 226 of the Constitution.2. In the writ petition, the appellant had challenged the validity of the notice dated September 26, 1969, issued by the ITO, respondent No. 1, under Section 148 of the I.T. Act, 1961. In the notice it was stated by the ITO that the income of the appellant chargeable to tax for the assessment year 1962-63 had escaped assessment within the meaning of Section 147 of the I.T. Act, 1961. The appellant was directed to file a return of his income for the said assessment year within 30 days of the date of the service of the notice. Further, it was stated in the notice that the necessarysanction of the Commissioner of Income-tax, West Bengal-III, had been obtaine...
Tag this Judgment!PulIn Behari Pal Vs. Mahadeb Dutta and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-25-1980
Reported in: AIR1981Cal61
ORDERP.K. Banerjee, J. 1. This appeal has been assigned to me by the Hon'ble Chief Justice on the difference of opinions of the Hon'ble Mr. Jus-lice N. C. Mukherji and the Hon'ble Mr. Justice S. M. Guha. The question for my consideration is whether the respondent landlord has waived his right to get a decree under Section 13 (1) (a) of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act because he accepted the rent from the tenant knowing fully well thatthe tenant has sub-let the premises in question without the previous consent of the landlord as incumbent under Section 13 (1) (a) of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act.2. Mr. Banerjee on behalf of the appellant supported the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Mr. Justice Guha while Mr. Das Gupta appearing for the respondent supported the view of the Hon'ble Mr. Justice N. C. Mukherjee. Mr. Banerjee contended that it has been found by both the Hon'ble Judges that the landlord knew of the existence of the sub-tenancy when he accepted the rent from the te...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Thomas Duff and Co. (India) Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-24-1980
Reported in: [1982]137ITR798(Cal)
Sabyasachi Mukharji, J.1. In this reference under Section 256(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961, two questions have been referred to us; which are as follows:1. ' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was, right in holding that only the net foreign dividend received by the assessee was includible in its total income under the provisions of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the relief under section 91 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, was available to the assessee ?' So far as the second question is concerned, in view of the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Clive Insurance Co. Ltd. : [1978]113ITR636(SC) , this question must be answered in the affirmative and in favour of the assessee. It must be remembered that Section 91 of the I.T. Act 1961, is similar to Section 49D of the Indian I.T. Act, 1922.2. So far as the first question is concerned, the assessm...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »