Kolkata Court September 1980 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.
Gopal Hossiery Vs. the Dy. Registrar of Trade Marks and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-03-1980
Reported in: AIR1981Cal53
Padma Khastgir, J.1. This appeal has been filed under the Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 by Gopal Hossiery, a registered partnership firm. The petitioner started the business in 1936 as manufacturers and dealers of hosiery goods. The respondent No. 3, Om Prakash Mehaswari carries on business under the name and style of Joykali Hossiery as manufacturer of Banians at No. 17, Pagaia Patti, Calcutta. It is the petitioner's case that the word 'Gopal' is a leading feature in petitioner's trade name and other principal trade marks and through considerable expenses and labour and by various modes of publicity, the business transaction by the petitioner for the last four decades have increased considerably. The Gopal Hossiery Products are sold by the petitioner throughout India and abroad and the total turnover of the petitioner's is 60 lakhs of rupees per year. Hence it is the petitioner's case that the good will and reputation attached to the word 'Gopal' in hosiery trade is very valua...
Abdul Latif Mullick and ors. Vs. Special Land Acquisition Collector an ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-02-1980
Reported in: AIR1981Cal395,85CWN148
ORDERManas Nath Roy, J.1. By a notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act), lands in full and in Plots Nos. 1376 and 1377. Jurisdiction List No. 108, P. S. Pandua, Village Pandua, District Hooghli. were sought to be acquired for a public purpose viz. for construction of office-cum-quarters of the Sectional Officers at Pandua for Rural Damodar Irrigation. Such notification was dated 22nd September, 1972, and was issued in the extraordinary issues of the Calcutta Gazette on 28th December 1972. The petitioners claim to be the owners of the lands as notified. It is the case of the petitioners that within the period as prescribed, the State of West Bengal had not published any declaration under Section 6 of the said Act, in respect of the plot of lands as mentioned in the notification under Section 4, by giving the boundaries, approximate areas and Khatian numbers and on 9th August 1974, for the first time, the petitioners receive...
Commissioner of Income-tax and Super Profits Tax Vs. Indian Leaf Tobac ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-02-1980
Reported in: (1981)22CTR(Cal)344,[1981]132ITR831(Cal)
Sabyasachi Mukharji, J.1. In this reference under Section 256(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961, the following question has been referred to this court:'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the order of the Tribunal holding that the sum of Rs. 58,85,850, being the excess of the amount of depreciation reserve over the amount of depreciation allowed under the Income-tax Act, was a reserve within the meaning of Rule 1 of the Second Schedule to the Super Profits Tax Act, 1963, is justified in law ?'2. The point was disposed of by the Tribunal for the reasons which are best set out in the words of the Tribunal as follows :'It was found that over the years, the assessee had debited in its books depreciation which was in excess of the depreciation allowed under the Income-tax Act by a sum of Rs. 58,85,850. The assessee claimed that this sum should be treated as reserve and included in the computation of capital. But this contention was rejected by the revenue authorities. (ii) I...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›