Kolkata Court February 1981 Judgments
In Re: Hindusthan Wire and Metal Products
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-25-1981
Reported in: [1983]54CompCas104(Cal)
Salil K. Roy Chowdhury, J. 1. This is an application under Section 633 of the Companies Act, 1956, for relieving the petitioners as a consequence of default and violation of Section 295 of the Companies Act, 1956, in granting a loan to another company being M/s. Associated Industrial Development Co. Pvt. Ltd. The application was presented on 28th June, 1980, and, thereafter/a notice was served on the respondent and directions for filing the affidavits were also given and it also appears that on 2nd July, 1980, there was an ad interim order of injunction in terms of prayer (c) restraining the respondent, the Registrar of Companies, West Bengal, from commencing any prosecution against the petitioners for the default and purchase as mentioned in the respondent's letter dated 12th May, 1980, or in similar notices in respect of the several violations under Section 295 of the Companies Act.2. It appears from the affidavit-in-opposition that the respondent, on 12th June, 1980, filed a petitio...
Tag this Judgment!In Re: M.L. Bose and Co. Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-24-1981
Reported in: AIR1982Cal71
ORDERSalil K. Roy Chowdhury, J.1. This is a winding up petition which was presented on 25th September. 1981, On the returnable date notice was directed to be served on the company along with copy of the petition. The company appeared and took direction for filing affidavit to show cause why the winding up petition should not be admitted. The petitioning creditor also filed a reply to the said affidavit. The petitioning creditor is a Deity Sri Sri Biswamata Debi which presented this petition through her Sebait and next friend Salil Kr. Mitra, trustee of the said deity.2. The claim arises out of a fixed deposit of Rs. 45,000/- made on or about 1st Oct. 1953 evidenced by 45 fixed de-posit receipts of Rs. 1,000/- each issued by the company bearing serial numbers 21 to 50. The terms and conditions of the fixed deposit are printed at the back of the said fixed deposit receipts. The fixed deposit was for a period of 21 years from 1st Oct. 1953 and would carry interest at the rate of 5% per an...
Tag this Judgment!Sankey Electrical Stampings Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-24-1981
Reported in: [1982]134ITR578(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 Tribunal was right in holding that, Rs.(i) Additional depreciation reserve6,58,100(ii) Provision for taxation24,23,193(iii) Provision for gratuity3,75,005(iv) Proposed dividend22,28,245 are to be excluded in computing the capital base for determination of standard deduction under Rule 2(1) of the Rules of the Second Schedule to the Super Profits Tax Act,' 1963 ' 2. We are concerned in this reference with the assessment for the assessment year 1963-64. The assessee is a public limited company. It claimed that the following four items should be included in the computation of the capital base as reserves as these formed other reserves within the meaning of r. 1 of the Second Schedule to the S.P.T. Act, 1963 :Amount in lakhs(a)Additional depreciation reserve6.5(b) Provision for tax24.2...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Jagabandhu Prasanna Kumar Ruplal Sen Po ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-24-1981
Reported in: (1981)23CTR(Cal)246,[1982]133ITR156(Cal)
Sabyasachi Mukharjt, 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, and on a correct interpretation of the Explanation to Section 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act, 1961, the Tribunal was justified in holding that no penalty Under Section 271(1)(c) could be imposed ?'2. The Tribunal discussing this appeal observed in the statement of the case as follows:'Aggrieved by the imposition of penalty the assessee came up in appeal before the Appellate Tribunal. The Appellate Tribunal considered the submission of the assessee's learned counsel, Shri Das, that the cash deposits were deleted from the assessee's total income by the AAC and, therefore, even if the addition on account of these cash deposits was restored by the Appellate Tribunal in the quantum appeal, held that it was at best an item in respect of which two opinions were possible and there can be no quest...
Tag this Judgment!Balrampur Sugar Co. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-23-1981
Reported in: [1982]135ITR227(Cal),[1982]51STC38(Cal)
Sabyasachi Mukharji, J. 1. This reference under Section 256(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961, relates to the assessment years 1972-73, 1973-74 and 1975-76. While making the assessments for the years involved, the ITO had allowed the claim of the assessee-company in respect of interest on arrears of cane purchase tax, properly called U.P. Sugarcane (Purchase Tax) Act, 1961, at Rs. 37,413, Rs. 67,362 and Rs. 9,603, respectively. The Commissioner of Income-tax was, however, of the view that the orders of the ITO allowing the claim of the assessee were erroneous in so far as these were prejudicial to the interest of revenue as the charge of interest on arrears under the U.P. Sugarcane (Purchase Tax) Act, 1961, was of a penal nature levied for a contravention of law. He was, therefore, of the view that the same was not eligible for deduction in the computation of the business profit. According to the Commissioner, the facts of the present case were similar to the facts in the case of CIT v. Mahalax...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Steel Group Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-23-1981
Reported in: (1981)22CTR(Cal)354,[1981]131ITR234(Cal)
Sudhindra Mohan Guha, J.1. The question posed before us in this reference is as follows :' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was justified in holding that in computing the income chargeable under the head 'Capital gains' arising from the sale of original 1,22,400 shares of M/s. Coles Cranes of India Ltd., the cost of acquisition of the shares to be deducted under Section 48 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, should be taken at Rs. 10 per share and not Rs. 4.80 per share as taken by the Income-tax Officer '2. The assessee was a limited company and the reference related to the assessment year 1972-73. The assessee-company was the owner of 1,22,400 shares of the face value of Rs. 10 each in M/s. Coles Cranes of India Ltd. which was acquired on 17th October, 1960, for Rs. 12,24,000 at the rate of Rs. 10 per share. On these shares, 1,32,600 bonus shares of the face value of Rs. 10 each, which ranked pari passu with the original shares, were issued ...
Tag this Judgment!Jaharlal Paul Vs. Ananda Chandra Paul and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-20-1981
Reported in: AIR1981Cal424
ORDERDipak Kumar Sen, J.1. The property which isthe subject-matter of the suit is premises No. 203/4. Bidhan Sarani, Calcutta (hereinafter referred to as the said premises). Bv an award made in an arbitration on the 12th April, 1949 the said premises was divided into four lots being A, B. C and D. Lot A was allotted to Ananda Chandra Paul the defendant No. 1. Lot B was allotted to Jahar-lal Paul the plaintiff : Lot C was allotted to Manick Lal Paul the defendant No. 3 and Lot D was allotted to Sushila Bala Paul. The allottees belonged to the same family. A decree was thereafter passed in terms of the said award. The said lots have since been accorded separate municipal numbers and Lot A has been numbered as 203/4B and Lots B. C and D have been similarly numbered 203/4C, 203/4D and 203/4A Bidhan Sarani.2. 203/4A Bidhan Sarani allotted to Manicklal has since been sold in execution and has been purchased by a stranger.3. In respect of the lots numbered 203/4A and 203/4C Bidhan Sarani liti...
Tag this Judgment!Gadadhar Pan Vs. University of Calcutta
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-19-1981
Reported in: AIR1981Cal216
ORDERB.C. Ray, J. 1. This Rule was obtained against the show cause notice issued on 10-9-80 by the Secretary, Council for Post Graduate Studies in Medicine, Calcutta University, directing the petitioner to show cause why his studentship in the M. D. (Pediatrics) Course will not be cancelled forthwith without any further intimation to him whatsoever on the ground that the petitioner suppressed in his application form the statement that he was in the employment of the Director of Health Services, West Bengal, at the time he applied for admission to the said course. 2. The petitioner passed M.B.B.S. Examination in 1975 and he was admitted to the Diploma in Child Health Course in 1978 after being selected through competitive examination and being successful, obtained Diploma in Child Health. The petitioner thereafter was appointed as Research Assistant (Pediatrics Gastro-Entrology) for one year in Calcutta Hospital in April 1979. On 12-2-80 he was appointed as Medical Officer, General Duty...
Tag this Judgment!Union of India (Uoi) and anr. Vs. Chinoy Chablani and Co.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-19-1981
Reported in: AIR1982Cal365
Ramendra Mohan Datta, J.1. This is an appeal from the judgment and order of Sabyasachi Mukharji, J. dated March 15, 1976 (reported in : AIR1976Cal467 . The learned Judge allowed the application and directed the plaint to be taken off the file. The application before him was made praying for such an order, inter alia, on the ground, that the plaint did not disclose any cause of action and, alternatively for dismissing the suit on the ground that this Court had no jurisdiction to try or to entertain the suit. The petitioner in the further alternative prayed for stay of the suit.2. The point involved in this appeal relates to the interpretation of Section 230(3) of the Contract Act, 1872. The appellant No. 1 and the Food Corporation of India, the appellant No. 2 filed the suit against the respondents who were carrying on business, inter alia, as steamer agents of one Black Sea Steamship Company of U.S.S.R. The said Steamship Company was the owner of the vessel 'S.S. SUDGA'. The plaintiff-...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Orient Supply Syndicate
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-19-1981
Reported in: (1981)22CTR(Cal)285,[1982]134ITR12(Cal)
Sabyasachi Mukharji, J.1. In this reference under Section 256(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961, arising out of the assessment for the assessment year 1964-65, the following question has been referred to us :' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and keeping in view the fact that the assessee followed the mercantile system of accounting, the Tribunal was correct in holding that, though the liability to pay the sum of Rs. 29,008 as provident fund contributions related to earlier years, it was allowable as a deduction in the computation of the assessee's income of the previous year relevant to the assessment year 1964-65, since the demand for the statutory contributions was raised by the statutory authority for the first time in the relevant previous year '2. It appears that the relevant previous year ended on May 31, 1963. The assessee is a firm dealing in wire ropes, chains and miscellaneous articles. In the computation of total income for the relevant previous year the as...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »