Kolkata Court March 1981 Judgments
Burrakur Coal Co. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-23-1981
Reported in: [1982]135ITR804(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 depreciation under Section 32(1)(ii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, read with Rule 5 of the Income-tax Rules, 1962, was not admissible @ 100% on coal tubs of the value of Rs. 12,85,132, on winding ropes of the value of Rs. 32,663 and on safety lamps of the value of Rs. 1,19,565 ?'2. In order to appreciate this question, we have to refer to certain facts. It appears from the order of the ITO that for the assessment year the assessee claimed 100% depreciation on coal tubs, cap lamps and haulage ropes. The contention of the assessee can best be appreciated in the words of the ITO, which are as follows:'During the year the assessee claimed 100% depreciation on coal tubs, cap lamps and haulage ropes. Prior to the amendment of Rule 5, these assets were no...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Madan Debi Kundalia Vs. Alpine Dairy Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-18-1981
Reported in: [1983]54CompCas41(Cal)
Salil Kumar Roy Chowdhury, J. 1. This is a winding-up petition presented on the 24th of January, 1980, and on the returnable date notice was directed to be served on the company to show cause why the winding-up petition should not be admitted. Thereafter, directions for filing affidavits were given. The company filed an affidavit and the petitioning-creditor also filed an affidavit-in-reply thereto. 2. The petitioning-creditors' claim is very simple and straight-forward for the price of goods sold and delivered pursuant to the orders placed by the company between February, 1978, to May, 1978. The petitioning-creditor has disclosed the bills and the receipted challans for such supplies and also various demand letters which were not replied to and ultimately, when the statutory notice was served through the advocate of the petitioning-creditor, being 7th of December, 1979, and after the presentation of the petition on the 24th of January, 1980, the alleged reply to the statutory notice d...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Orient Paper Mills Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-18-1981
Reported in: (1981)23CTR(Cal)180,[1983]139ITR763(Cal)
Sabyasachi Mukharji, J.1. This reference under Section 256(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961, relates to the assessment year 1971-72. It appears that the ITO did not allow relief under Section 80-I of the I.T. Act, 1961, as the assessee had not claimed the same in the return as required under the I.T. Rules. In this connection it may not be inappropriate to refer to the relevant portion of the order of the ITO which reads as follows:'(5) Development rebate for earlier year as detailed below:Up to 68-69 A. Y.Rs. 23,79,623 69-70 'Rs.6,94,995 70-71 'Rs. 15,82,829Rs. 46,57,447 '2. Thereafter, the ITO has observed as follows :' Under Section 80-I on Rs. 4,60,42,731 @ 8%, i.e., after adjustment of income under Section 41(2), rent, sundry receipt, technical know-how and rebate allowed under Section 80G. Rs. 36,83,418Rs. 2,47,82.407Total income:Rs. 2,31,02,004Round off to :Rs. 2,31,02,000'3. There was an appeal before the AAC. The AAC, relying upon the decision in the case of Indian Transformers Ltd. :...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Bengal Mills and Steamers Presbyterian ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-17-1981
Reported in: [1983]140ITR586(Cal)
Sudhindra Mohan Guha, J.1. In this reference at the outset we must put on record our deep appreciation for the services rendered by Mr. Pranab Paul as an amicus curiae.2. This reference arises out of an application under Section 256(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961, at the instance of the Commissioner in respect of the assessment for the years 1968-69 and 1969-70, The assesses, the Bengal Mills &Steamers; Presbyterian Association (hereinafter referred to as 'the association') is a very old association havingibeen registered as a society under the Societies Registration Act, 1860, as back as in the year 1906. The association was then formed by a few European residents of Bengal for the purpose of carrying out the objects set out in Clause 3 of the memorandum of association dated 25th January, 1906. The main object set out in Clause 3(a) thereof is : 'to make provision for supplying and maintaining instruction and diffusion of useful knowledge and maintain the ordinances of religion among the Eu...
Tag this Judgment!Banka Behari Dutt Vs. Gour Mohan Dutta
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-13-1981
Reported in: AIR1981Cal185,85CWN548
Sudhindra Mohan Guha, J. 1. The tenant-defendant has come up in appeal against the judgment and decree of Sri M. Roy, Subordinate Judge, Purulia, affirming the judgment and decree of ejectment passed by the Munsif, Purulia. 2. The respondent commenced a suit for ejectment against the appellant on determination of tenancy, on the grounds of default in payment of rent and reasonable requirement for the purpose of starting business in rice by his two unemployed sons. The appellant held the tenancy consisting of two rooms at a monthly rental of Rs. 45/- according to Bengali calendar month. 3. The learned Munsif found that the tenancy had been determined by a valid notice to quit and the plaintiff reasonably required the premises in suit for his own use. Such findings were affirmed in appeal by the learned Subordinate Judge. 4. Mr. S. C. Das Gupta, the learned Advocate for the appellant, contends that the Respondent's case as to starting of business by his unemployed sons is not consistent....
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Soorajmull Nagarmall
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-12-1981
Reported in: [1983]141ITR140(Cal)
Sabyasachi Mukharji, J.1. In this reference under Section 256(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961, the following questions have been referred to this court:'(i) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the provisions of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, were not saved for the purpose of completing the assessment under Section 23(4) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, after April 1, 1962, in a case where a notice under Section 22(2) has been validly served prior to that date but no return had been filed and in that view cancelling the order under Section 23(4) for the assessment year 1961-62 ? (ii) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the provisions of the Income-tax Act, 1961, were not applicable and the order under Section 23(4) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, could not be sustained as having been passed u/s. 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ? (iii) Whether, on the facts ...
Tag this Judgment!Shewbuxrai Onkarmall Vs. Asstt. Collector of Customs and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-11-1981
Reported in: 1981(8)ELT298(Cal)
P.C. Borooah, J.1. In or about August 1978 the petitioners in these three Rules imported consignments of Soda Ash of light variety from Rumania for their use in their factories for the manufacture of Sodium Silicate. On arrival of the goods at the port of Calcutta, the goods were not immediately cleared for home consumption, but were kept in a bonded warehouse without payment of any duty thereon under the Customs Tariff Act, 1975. Thereafter parts of the consignments were cleared by the three petitioners on payment of the relevant customs duty chargeable on the relevant date.2. On January 4, 1979 the Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue issued two Notifications under Section 25 of the Customs Act, 1962 (hereinafter 'the Act') exempting Soda Ash of both the light and dense varieties from the payment of certain portion of the Customs Duty and the whole of the auxiliary duty leviable under Sub-section (1) of Section 35 of the Finance Act. Copies of these two Notifications are annexu...
Tag this Judgment!Nainsukhdas JainaraIn Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-10-1981
Reported in: [1983]139ITR467(Cal)
Sabyasachi Mukharji, J. 1. In this reference under Section 256(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961, the assessment year involved is 1969-70. The assessee-firm filed a declaration in Form No. 12 of the I.T. Rules, 1962, for a continuation of registration up to August 4, 1968, and also an application in Form No. 11A for a fresh registration. According to Form No. 12, there were six partners up to August 4, 1968. Form No. 11A showed that there was a change in the constitution of the firm with effect from August 5, 1968, by a fresh deed of partnership dated August 5, 1968, between two partners, Shri Ramlal Daga and Sri Srinarain Daga, the remaining four partners having retired earlier. It was stated before the ITO that one of the partners, Sri Srinarain Daga had retired on March 30, 1968, and that a division of profits had been made proportionate to the periods of the different constitutions of the firm. There was no deed of partnership of the five partners after the retirement of Shri Srinarain Daga...
Tag this Judgment!In Re: Badri Narayan Thakur
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-09-1981
Reported in: AIR1981Cal214
ORDERB.C. Ray, J.1. This application is directed against a resolution passed by the Managing Committee of Shree Mandhari High School, Kanchrapara, District 24 Parganas, against the petitioner, it has been urged by Mr. Mukherjee learned Advocate for the petitioner that the school is an agency or in other words an instrument of the State and as such it comes within other authorities under Article 12 of the Constitution and hence a Writ of Mandamus is maintainable against the resolution adopted by such an institution. I am unable to accept the submissions of Mr. Mukherjee on this point. As regards the resolution in my opinion there is no infirmity. There is no doubt that the majority of the members of the Managing Committee of this Institution adopted the resolution and as such it is perfectly a legal and valid resolution. As regards the maintainability of a writ petition against a resolution passed by the Managing Committee of a School it has been urged on behalf of the petitioner with g...
Tag this Judgment!V.P. Samtani Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-09-1981
Reported in: [1982]135ITR313(Cal)
Sabyasachi Mukharji, J. 1. In this reference under Section 256(2) of the I.T. Act, 1961, as directed by this court, the following two questions have been referred to this court:'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law and acted within its jurisdiction in upholding the imposition of penalty with reference to the amount of Rs. 1,88,800 and which did not constitute the basis on which the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner passed his order 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the amount of Rs. 1,83,737 having been declared by the assessee in Part F of his return, could at all attract the provisions of Section 271(1)(c) ?' 2. In order to appreciate the questions, it is necessary to refer that the ITO in this case initiated penalty proceedings and referred the same to the IAC under Section 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act, 1961. This relates to the assessment year 1963-64. The assessee had filed the return on 10th Septem...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »