Kolkata Court May 1981 Judgments
State Bank of India Vs. Netai Ch. Porel
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-05-1981
Reported in: AIR1982Cal92
B.C. Chakrabarti, J.1. This is revisional application at the instance of the petitioner, State Bank of India and is directed against an order dated Dec. 3, 1980 passed in Act 39, Case No, 414/78 of the Court of the District Delegate at Alipore.2. Facts are simple and may be stated thus.3. One Juthikabala Porel wife of the opposite party No. 1 kept certain ornaments and jewelleries in a Safe-Deposit Locker of the State Bank of India at its main branch, Calcutta. She having died, her husband the opposite party herein applied for succession certificate in respect of the said goods which was registered as Act 39, Case No. 414/78, After the filing of the said application a question was raised by the Court as to whether the prayer for grant of succession certificate in respect of the said goods was maintainable. After hearing the learned Advocate for the opposite party the petitioner in that case, the learned District Delegate by his order dated June 12, 1978 held, on the authority of the de...
Tag this Judgment!Prodyut Kumar Dutta and ors. Vs. Competent Authority, Inspecting Assis ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-05-1981
Reported in: (1981)24CTR(Cal)284,[1982]134ITR42(Cal)
Sabyasachi Mukharji, J.1. This is an appeal under Section 269J of the I.T. Act, 1961, against the order of the I.T- Appellate Tribunal, 'B' Bench, in respect of an acquisition order under Section 269F(6) of the I.T. Act,-1961, by the Competent Authority, namely, the IAC, Acquisition, Range-I, regarding premises No. 105/7B, Surendra Nath Banerjee Road, Calcutta. There is a house property at No. 105/7B, Surendra Nath Banerjee Road, Calcutta, consisting of one-storeyed brick-building housing a few shops mainly with land on part whereof the same is built covering an area of 4.7 kottahs, belonging to one Sri Amar Nath Seal of 308, Chittaranjan Avenue, which was sold to three different persons under three different conveyances registered with the Registrar of Assurances, Calcutta. The names of the purchasers are (1) Sri Provat Kumar Dutta, (2) Sri Prasanta Kumar Dutta, and (3) Sri Prodyut Kumar Dutta. Each of them was the purchaser of an 1/3rd undivided share for a consideration ofRs. 34,000...
Tag this Judgment!B.B. Sarkar Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-05-1981
Reported in: (1982)26CTR(Cal)13,[1981]132ITR150(Cal)
Sabyasachi Mukharji, J. 1. The assessee in this case is an individual and the reference relates to the assessment year 1975-76. The assessee sold his dwelling house at No. 1, Park Lane, Calcutta, on 26th July, 1974, for a consideration of Rs. 3,15,000. He also purchased one house property at No. 91, Shyambazar Street, Calcutta, on 13th June, 1975, for a consideration of Rs. 1,23,001 and; invested a further sum of Rs. 1,08,300 before March 27, 1976, for the construction of an additional floor thereon. The latter house was being used for the purpose of the assessee's residence. Since thepurchase price together with the cost of development of the house property at No. 1, Park Lane, Calcutta, was Rs. 83,801, the ITO determined the capital gains at Rs. 2,31,199 by deducting the sum of Rs. 83,801 from Rs. 3,15.000. In the subsequent assessment year, the ITO determined that amount as the capital gain and rejected the assessee's claim for deduction of Rs. 1,23,000 under Section 54(1) being the...
Tag this Judgment!India Foils Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-05-1981
Reported in: 1982(10)ELT966(Cal)
P.C. Borooah, J.1. India Foils Ltd. the petitioner No. 1 (hereinafter referred to as the company carries on business in the manufacture and sale of aluminium foils of diverse varieties including foils known as tea chest linings. These foils are manufactured by the company at its factory at Kamarhati in the District of 24-Parganas.2. According to the Writ petition, tea chest lining foils are bare foils which are not backed by any reinforcing material; after being manufactured these foils are interleaved with duty paid tissue paper to ensure that the edges of the foils do not get stuck in the process of being cut to shape. Neither is the tissue paper used for the purpose of interleaving glued or pasted to the foils with any adhesive.3. When the Excise authorities demanded payment of excise duty on the tissue paper used for interleaving the aluminium foils for tea chest linings, the company drew the attention of the said authorities to a Notification bearing No. 155/72, dated 15-6-72, iss...
Tag this Judgment!Birla Vidhya Vihar Trust Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Central I
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-04-1981
Reported in: (1981)24CTR(Cal)307,[1982]136ITR445(Cal)
Sabyasachi Mukharji, J. 1. In this reference under Section 256(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961, the Tribunal has referred to this court the following question ;'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and on the correct legal scope of Section 10(22) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the assessee was not entitled to exemption under Section 10(22) in respect of the income from Mahadevi Birla Girls' High School and Mahadevi Birla Sishu Vihar ?'2. The assessment year involved is 1972-73. The assessee is a trust which had been recognised as such under Section 11 for the purpose of exemption by the ITO. We shall presently refer to the relevant provisions of the trust deed. In Part IV of the return, the assessee had claimed exemption underSection 10(22) in respect of the income from Mahadevi Birla Girls' High School and Mahadevi Birla Sishu Vihar. The ITO rejected this claim on the ground that the section applied only to educational instituti...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›