Kolkata Court July 1981 Judgments
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Dhanraj Dugar
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-27-1981
Reported in: [1982]137ITR350(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, and on a proper interpretation of the terms of agreement dated the 15th October, 1959 and 2nd June, 1971, the Tribunal was right in holding that the sum of Rs. 1,00,000 received by the assessee arose not out of the normal business as a broker but out of the distribution of capital assets of the firm or other association of persons within the meaning of Section 47(ii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961?'2. The assessment year involved in this case is 1972-73. In that assessment the ITO noted that the assessee's system of accounting was mercantile. The assessee is an individual and he derived his income from the business as a broker of land and building. The assessee had shown a sum of Rs. 1,00,000 in Part II of the return and had claimed that it was a capital receipt not liable to income-tax. ...
Tag this Judgment!Bholanath Mondal and ors. Vs. Kalipada Mondal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-23-1981
Reported in: AIR1981Cal295
ORDERSudhindra Mohan Guha, J. 1. The present application for revision arises out of orders dated 28-1-1981 passed by Sri T. K. Paladhi, Munsif, 3rd Court, Burdwan in Title Suits Nos. 103 of 1975 and 26 of 1977 heard analogously.2. T. S. No. 103 of 1975 was instituted by the petitioners against the opposite party for eviction on declaration of their title and other reliefs whereas T. S. No. 26 of 1977 was filed by opposite party against the petitioners for declaration of his title and other reliefs. Both the suits were taken up for hearing and the petitioners closed their evidence. On 14-1-81 the opposite party examined certain witnesses without examining himself on filing an application under Order 18, K. 3A for permission of the Court to appear as a witness at a later stage. On 28-1-1981 the petitioners filed an application under Order 18, Rule 3A stating that the petitioners would be prejudiced if the opposite party is allowed to appear as a witness at a later stage, when he got the ...
Tag this Judgment!Sk. Nafel Ali Vs. Sm. Nihar Bala Das
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-23-1981
Reported in: AIR1981Cal273
Sudhindra Mohan Guha, J. 1. This second appeal by the plaintiff is directed against the decision of the Subordinate Judge, 4th Court, Alipore affirming the judgment and decree of dismissal passed by Sri A. N. Saha, Munsif, Alipore in T. S. No. 483 of 1962.2. The land in suit comprising an area of 2.70 acres and appertaining to khatiaaNo. 209 of mouza Banagram was held by the plaintiff under the State of West Bengal at an annual jama of Rs. 97.25. The public demands for the years 1364-66 B. S. were due. A certificate proceeding was started to realise the amount due. The case of the plaintiff was that the land in suit was illegally put to sale without service of notice upon the plaintiff, as provided under the P. D. R. Act, and purchased by the defendant at auction at a shockingly low price of Rs. 301/-only. After the confirmation of sale on 10-4-1962 the defendant was said to have made attempts to take possession of the same. Hence the suit,3. The suit was contested by the defendant. Al...
Tag this Judgment!Katras Jherriah Coal Co. Ltd. Vs. Mercantile Bank
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-23-1981
Reported in: AIR1981Cal418,1981(2)CHN146,86CWN1
B.C. Chakrabarti, J.1. This is an application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India at the instance of the petitioner, Katras Jherriah Coal Co. Ltd., and is directed against an appellate order passed in Misc. Appeal No. 52 of 1979 of the Court of the District Judge, Burdwan, affirming the order of the Commissioner of Payments in several claim cases brought at the instance of the opp. party, Mercantile Bank Ltd. The claim cases related to several collieries known as Lachipur, Seebpore, Pretoria and Dangra, of which the petitioner was the owner, the total claim being Rs. 40,23,580.29. Separate claims in respect of the aforesaid separate collieries were made and alt the cases were heard analogously.2. Briefly stated the case of the claimant is as follows : --By virtue of an agreement entered into by and between the claimant Bank (hereinafter called the Bank) and the Coal Company (hereinafter called the Company) in 1962 the Bank agreed to grant accommodation to the company by way ...
Tag this Judgment!State Trading Corporation India Ltd. Vs. Indian Molasses Company Priva ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-23-1981
Reported in: AIR1981Cal440
ORDERSalil K. Roy Chowdhury, J.1. This is an application under Sections 5, 11, 12 and 15 of the Arbitration Act, 1940, inter alia for revoking the authority of the Arbitrator being Tribunal of Arbitration, Bengal Chamber of Commerce and Industry, in respect of Case No. 143 of 1977 pending before the same and for removal of the Arbitrator and appointment of a sole Arbitrator and consequential reliefs.2. The facts of the case which are not disputed are that by a contract in writing dated 29th of January, 1969, entered into between the parties, the respondent agreed to store imported non-edible tallow in Steel Storage Tank situated at Ram Nagar on the terms and conditions contained in the said contract. Under the said contract the respondent was appointed as the clearing storage. handling and forwarding agent in respect of the said tallow which was to be imported by the petitioner and stored in the said tank of the respondent on the terms and conditions of the said contract. The said stor...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Shila Banerjee Vs. State of West Bengal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-22-1981
Reported in: AIR1982Cal9
ORDERR.N. Pyne, J.1. By a writing and/or work order dated 9-4-1976/15-4-1976 being Tender No. 34/S/M of 1976-77, the petitioner and the respondent entered into a contract for construction of a road bridge over the 'Madaria Khal' at chain 1237.00 at an estimated cost and/or value of Rs. 2,69,115/-. By another writing and/or work order dated August 9, 1976 being reference No. 1182 and Tender No. 9 (M) of 76-77 the parties entered 79 E/Minto another contract for the work of putting, maintaining, removing the cross bundh, construction of diversion channel and refilling the same after construction and construction of the approach road at the site of minor road bridge at chain 1237.00 On 'Madaria Khal' an estimated cost and/or value of Rs. 23,300/-. It is stated that the said two contracts consist of the following documents :--(i) West Bengal Form No. 2911 (ii)---- In the case of First Contract -- and 2911 (i), in the case of Second Contract, (ii) Schedule of rates attached to the respective...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Naskarpara Jute Mills Co. Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-22-1981
Reported in: (1982)28CTR(Cal)365,[1983]141ITR384(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 right to receive further interest from the date of the suit accrues to the assessee only when the court passes decree (ii) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the matter of assessment of interest cannot be decided unless the result of the suit already filed is known (iii) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and particularly in view of the fact that the debtor-company in its written statement has admitted the liability with regard to the quantum of loan advanced and the rate of interest, the Tribunal was justified in sending the matter back to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner to decide the issue afresh after the result of the suit is known ?'2....
Tag this Judgment!Reckitt and Colman of India Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-22-1981
Reported in: (1982)26CTR(Cal)24,[1982]135ITR698(Cal)
Sabyasachi Mukharji, J. 1. It appears that in this reference in respect of the relevant year the profits of the company before payment of taxes as per the profit and loss account was Rs. 1,06,62,415. The income returned by the assessee was Rs. 1,06,80,025. The income assessed by the ITO as per the assessment order appearing in the paper book was Rs. 1,08,05,310. The taxes that were paid by the assessee for the year were Rs. 73,32,054. The month-wise break-up appears to be as follows : MonthTrading receipts deposited in the bank overdraft account as per assessment orderTaxes paid from the bank over draft account as per assessment order(1)(2)(3) Rs.Rs.November 196939,18,5888,42,865December 196929,56,97614,52,504January 197046,70,07540,931February 197067,68,6106,991 1,49,282 3,62,506June 197057,57,36210,50,210 3,92,185September 197041,04,82519,49,895 10,75,662October 197059,62,2519,023 3,41,38,68173,32,0542. In the background of these facts which will appear from the order of the ITO in t...
Tag this Judgment!Remington Rand of India Ltd. and anr. Vs. the Collector of Central Exc ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-22-1981
Reported in: 1981(8)ELT874(Cal)
ORDERP.C. Borooah, J.1. The Petitioner No. 1 Remington Rand of India Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the Company) having their registered and head office at 3, Council House Street, Calcutta, carries on business inter alia in the manufacture and sale of typewriters and typewriter ribbons and other office equipments. The Company has a factory at 493/C, G.T. Road (South), Howrah. Apart from manufacturing typewriter ribbons in their own factory, the Company also purchases typewriter ribbons and other items from other manufacturers and sells the same in the market through their own selling organisations.2. On or about August 17, 1978, M/s. Rainbow Ribbon Industries, (Respondent No. 4) offered the Company for sale various types of ribbons manufactured by them as per their specification, a copy whereof is annexed to the petition, and marked with the letter 'A'. The Company by their letter dated August 29, 1978 a copy of which is annexure 'B' to the petition, informed the respondent No. 4 th...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Chamarchi Tea, Textile and Engineering ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-21-1981
Reported in: [1982]137ITR281(Cal)
Sabyasachi Mukharji, J.1. The question referred to us under Section 256(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961, is as follows ' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in holding that the assessee was entitled to the deduction of the provision of gratuity, if ascertained on actuarial principles, in computing the profit and gains of the assessee's business for the assessment year 1972-73?'2. The assessment year involved is 1972-73. The assessee made a provision for the payment of gratuity to its employees of Rs. 2,95,494 under the provisions of the West Bengal Payment of Compulsory Gratuity Act, 1971, which came into force during the year under consideration and claimed the same as a deduction as business expenses. The ITO did not accept the assessee's claim on the ground that the assessee had failed to produce any actuarial computation of its liability for the payment of gratuity. He, however, observed that the assessee's claim would be reconsidered on th...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »