Kolkata Court December 1981 Judgments
international Woollen Mills Vs. Income-tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-31-1981
Reported in: (1982)1ITD654(Kol.)
1. This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) dated 30-12-1978 relating to the assessment year 1974-75.2. The first issue in this appeal is regarding the sustention of the disallowance of Rs. 1,67,586 made by the ITO on account of loss due to confiscation of woollen rags by the customs department.3. The factual back-drop relating to this issue is as under : The assessee is a registered firm working under the name and style of International Woollen Mills, Industrial Area, Ludhiana. It maintains its books of account on mercantile system of accounting and its previous year is the financial year, which for the assessment year under appeal ended on 31-3-1974. During the course of assessment proceedings, the ITO found that there was a debit of a sum of Rs. 1,67,586 representing the value of rags which were confiscated by the customs authorities during the year. He, therefore, asked the assessee to justify this claim. It was explained by the asses...
Tag this Judgment!Protiva Debi and ors. Vs. Zilla Parishad, Howrah
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-24-1981
Reported in: AIR1982Cal152,1982(1)CHN73,86CWN329
ORDERAnil K. Sen, J.1. This Rule was obtained by the defendants in Title Suit No. 362 of 1980 of the Court of the learned Munsif, Uluberia on a revisional application and is directed against an appellate order dated June 29. 1981, passed by the learned Subordinate Judge. 3rd Court, Howrah, in Misc. Appeal No. 28 of 1981 thereby affirming an order of temporary injunction granted by the learned Munsif as against the defendants. The Rule is being contested by the plaintiff/opposite party, the Zilla Parishad, Howrah.2. It is not in dispute that by a registered deed of lease dated December 10, 1906, the District Board of Howrah, the predecessor-in-interest of the present plaintiff granted permanent lease in respect of 8 cottahs 9 chittaks and 35 square feet of barrow pit land described within boundaries in favour of the predecessor-in-interest of the present defendants. It would appear from the boundary of the leasehold land as set out in the said deed of lease that but for a village pathwa...
Tag this Judgment!New Central Jute Mills Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Central-i
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-24-1981
Reported in: (1982)30CTR(Cal)371,[1982]136ITR742(Cal)
Sabyasachi Mukharji, J.1. In this reference under Section 256(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961, the question referred to this court is as follows:'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, liquidated damages of Rs. 1 lakh and interest payment of Rs. 1,85,123 are allowable deductions under the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?'2. The assessee is a company. The assessment year is 1968-69 and the relevant accounting year is the financial year which ended on 31st March, 1968. On the 2nd of June, 1967, the assessee entered into an agreement with M/s. Ashoka Marketing Ltd. for the sale of about 29 acres of lands at Ghusury for a consideration of Rs. 45 lakhs. M/s. Ashoka Marketing Ltd. paid Rs. 40 lakhs to the assessee for the purchase of the aforesaid land by way of part payment. The aforesaid land had been pledged with the Govt. of Uttar Pradesh against a loan granted by the Uttar Pradesh Govt. for the Soda Ash-cum-Ammonium Chloride factory of the assessee at Varanasi. In the aforesaid agre...
Tag this Judgment!Patrick Herbert Van-hek Vs. Mrs. More Ilma Van-hek
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-23-1981
Reported in: AIR1982Cal356
B.C. Chakrabarti, J. 1. This is a reference under Section 17 of the Divorce Act made by the learned Additional District Judge, 7th Court, Alipore after having passed a decree of divorce in Divorce Suit No. 5 of 1978 of his Court. The petitioner instituted the suit in 1977 on an allegation that the petitioner and the respondent both of whom are Indian citizens professing the Christian, faith were married in May, 1944. Since after the marriage they were living peacefully and four children were born to them. The children have attained majority and art now living abroad. Sometime in 1965 the respondent wife picked up acquaintance and intimacy with a seaman and became very friendly with him. She started mixing with the said seaman freely and in such a manner that the petitioner felt humiliated and lowered in the estimation of others. His attempts to correct and mend the wife turned futile. On the 25th Dec. 1965 the respondent left the matrimonial home and went away to her mother's place at ...
Tag this Judgment!Brojendra Kumar Ghosh Vs. Mrs. Arpana Ghosh and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-23-1981
Reported in: AIR1982Cal360,(1982)2CompLJ132(Cal)
Sudhindra Mohan Guha, J. 1. The instant reference has been made by Sri A. K. Chatterjee, District Judge, Burdwan for confirmation of the decree passed in Matrimonial Suit No. 70 of 1976 under the Indian Divorce Act 2. An application under Sections 10 and 34 of the Divorce Act, 1869 was presented by the petitioner, Brojendra Kumar Ghosh for dissolution of marriage of the petitioner with respondent No. 1, Mrs. Arpana Ghosh on the ground that she had been guilty of adultery with the corespondent No. 2, Sri Dilip Sen and for damages amounting to Rs. 2,000/- against the co-respondent. 3. Both the respondent and co-respondent made their appearance before the court below, but ultimately the suit was not contested by them and as a result the decree was passed ex parte. 4. The petitioner is a Christian by religion and both the parties are domiciled in India for all material times. The petitioner alleged that respondent No. 1 who was married to him had been guilty of adultery with co-respondent ...
Tag this Judgment!ismail Sk. Vs. FosiuddIn Mondal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-22-1981
Reported in: AIR1982Cal146,86CWN279
B.C. Chakrabarti, J. 1. Thesetwo Rules are directed against an appellate order passed in Misc. Appeal Nos. 87/78 and 88/78 of the 3rd Court of the Id. Additional District Judge, Murshidabad affirming an order of preemption under Section 8 of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act passed in Misc. Case Nos. 19/77 and 20/77 of the 2nd Court of Munsif at Jangipur. The miscellaneous cases were disposed of by a common judgment and the appeals too were heard analogously. 2. Both the courts below having allowed the prayer for pre-emption, the petitioners in these revisional applications have raised a short point in opposing the order, namely whether the court could legally make any order for pre-emption in view of the provisions of Section 14-M of the Land Reforms Act. (hereinafter referred to as the Act), without determination of the ceiling area mentioned in the said section. 3. Section 14-M appertains to Chapter IIB of the Act which was introducedby the West Bengal Land Reforms (Amendment) Act. 1...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Usha Das (Roy) Vs. Smt. Arati Kar (Maiti)
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-22-1981
Reported in: AIR1982Cal174,86CWN337
ORDERSudhindra Mohan Guha, J.1. This application for revision arises out of an order dated 29th June 1981 passed by Sri B. Bhattacharjee, Additional District Judge, Midnapore, Misc. Appeal No. 227 of 1980 revering the order passed by the Munsif, 1st court. Tamluk, rejecting an application for temporary injunction in title suit No. 243 of 1979.2. This suit was commenced by O. P. No. 1 Sm. Arati Kar (Malty) against, the petitioner Sm. Usha Das (Ray) and ors. for a declaration that she is the officiating Headmistress of Tulia Sitala Balika Vidyapith and the resignation by the petitioner defendant No. 2 was final and irrevocable and order of approval of appointment of defendant No. 2 dated 2lst Feb. 1978 showing the purported date of the appointment as on 23rd Aug. 1977 was a nullity and invalid and the order of plaintiff's suspension passed by the Administrator was without jurisdiction.3. Plaintiff's application for temporary injunction was rejected by the Munsif upon the finding that the...
Tag this Judgment!Surjya Kumar Das Vs. Sm. Maya Dutta
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-22-1981
Reported in: AIR1982Cal222,86CWN359
B.N. Maitra, J.1. The present suit for partition was filed by one Maya Dutta, daughter of Radha Raman Das aliasRadha Charan Das, a Hindu governed by the Dayabhaga School of Hindu Law. He was the owner of the disputed property, being premises No. 3B Collins Street, Calcutta. The defendant, Surjya Kumar Das, is her brother. On the 4th April, 1969, she instituted the Suit No. 964 of 1969 against her brother in this Court for a declaration that she and her brother belonged to a joint family governed by the Dayabhaga School of Hindu Law and she was the sole and absolute owner of the premises No. 3B Collins Street, Calcutta, and for other reliefs. Ultimately, the parties came to terms and a decree was passed that the parties were governed by the Dayabhaga School of Hindu Law and they were absolute owners of the disputed property to the extent of a moiety share each. In view of the strained relations between them, It has become inconvenient for her to enjoy the property. She called upon her b...
Tag this Judgment!Prem Chandra Das Vs. the State of West Bengal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-18-1981
Reported in: 1982CriLJ576
N.G. Chaudhuri, J.1. The petitioner Prema Das along with others faced trial Under Section 10 of the west Bengal Gambling Act and Sec, 9 of the West Bengal Maintenance of Public Order Act in Sessions Trial No. 3 of June, 1978 before- the 5th Court of Additional Sessions Judge at Alipore. In connection with the same, some jewelleries, ornaments and other articles were seized by the police and were produced at the time of trial. When the prayer for return of the jewelleries came up for consideration at the conclusion of the trial, the learned Sessions Judge, instead of himself making an order under Sub-section (1) of Section 452 Cr. P. C, ordered in exercise of his power under Sub-section (3) by order dated 14-1-79 delivery of the seized properties to Chief Judicial Magistrate, 24-Parganas at Alipore, The learned C. J. M. by his order dated 4-8-1979 ordered confiscation of the seized articles to the State. Aggrieved with the said order Prema Das has come up in revision and on his behalf t...
Tag this Judgment!Kali Sadhan Banerjee and ors. Vs. K.K. Banerji and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-17-1981
Reported in: AIR1982Cal158,86CWN583
Amitabha Dutta, J. 1. This is an appeal from the decision of the learned Additional District Judge at Suri in Title Appeal No. 59 of 1971 affirming the judgment and decree of the learned Munsiff. First Court at Rampurhat by which he has decreed the Title Suit No. 163 of 1968 for a declaration of title and permanent injunction. 2. The only point that arises in this appeal relates to the construction of the terms of a deed of settlement. Admittedly the disputed tank in plot No. 1390 of Mouza Karkariya. 8 annas share in which is the subject matter of the suit, originally belonged to Janaki and Aghor Nath Baneriees who were two brothers. Janaki executed a deed of settlement dated 25th Aug. 1918 (8th Bhadra 1325 B. S.) in respect of his 8 annas share in the disputed tank and other properties in favour of his wife Brojendra Bala and son Dhwajadhari. The relevant recitals in the said deed of settlement are as follows:-- 'Tumi Srimati Brojendra Bala Debi Adya Nija Jibankal Parjanta Nicher Likh...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »