Kolkata Court December 1982 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Sundardas Thackersay and Bros Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-13-1982
Reported in: [1984]147ITR524(Cal)
Sabyasachi Mukharjee, J.1. The Tribunal has referred to us the following question :' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in upholding the orders dated 15th February, 1968, passed by the Income-tax Officer under Section 154 of the I.T. Act, 1961 '2. The assessee is a firm registered under the Act. The assessment years are 1963-64 and 1964-65.3. As there was delay of two months in filing the returns of income for each of the years under reference, the ITO imposed penalty under Section 271(1)(a) of the Act, vide his orders both dated 16th November, 1967. The ITO worked out the quantum of penalty on the basis of the assessed tax payable by the assessee as a registered firm. Against the said orders of the ITO, the assessee preferred appeals before the AAC. Pending the said appeals, the ITO noticed that the quantum of penalty worked out by him was not in accordance with the provisions of Section 271(2) of the Act, Inasmuch as he had worked o...
Calcutta Investment Co. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-13-1982
Reported in: [1983]142ITR120(Cal)
Suhas Chandra Sen, J. 1. The question referred in this case is as follows:'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the interest on loan to M/s. Central Cotton Mills Ltd., was liable to be included in the assessment on the due basis and not on the basis of realisation and was, therefore, right in sustaining the addition of Rs. 55,000, being interest on the said loan calculated on the due basis.'2. The facts relevant to this case and as found by the Tribunal are as follows :The assessee claimed before the ITO that a sum of Rs. 55,000 was not taken into account by it as it considered realisation of the loan doubtful. The ITO rejected the assessee's claim on the ground that the assessee was maintaining the accounts on mercantile basis and that the interest could not escape assessment on the only ground that the debt was doubtful. Therefore, following his decision for earlier years, the ITO included Rs. 55,000 in the total income of...
American Pipe Company Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-10-1982
Reported in: AIR1985Cal186
S.C. Ghose, C.J. 1. This appeal is directed against a judgment and decree dated Jan. 17 and 22, 1973 passed by Ajoy K. Basu, J. By the said judgment and decree, the learned .trial Judge dismissed the suit of the appellant. The appellant's suit was filed in the following circumstances :--By a contract in writing dated 21st June, 1952 (together with annexures of special conditions dated 21st June, 1952) the appellant agreed to sell and the respondent agreed to purchase through the Superintending Engineer. Tubewell Circle, East Moradabad, 50,000 running feet of pipes on terms and conditions mentioned in the said contract read along with the said annexures of special conditions. The appellant submitted tender and offered to supply the said pipes from its place of business in Calcutta within the said jurisdiction and received the acceptance thereof at the said place. The appellant also received the tender notice at Calcutta within the said jurisdiction. The said contract, inter alia, contai...
Tarachand Agarwalla Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-10-1982
Reported in: AIR1983Cal268
S.C. Ghose, C.J. 1. This appeal arises out of a judgment and decree D/-Aug. 20. 1969 passed by R. M. Datta, J. By the said judgment and decree the learned trial Judge dismissed the suit on the ground that it was barred by the laws of Limitation. The appellant based his claim in the plaint against the Union of India as the owner of Railway Authorities for non-delivery of goods of the value of Rs. 27,125/-. 520 maunds of gram were booked on June 7, 1948 by one Pratap Singh at Narowana Junction station on the then East Punjab Railway for carriage to and delivery at Siliguri on the East Indian Railway. In the railway receipt granted in respect of the said goods Pratap Singh was the consignor and consignee. The second consignment of goods of 565 mounds approximately of gram was booked by one Saleghram Pearilal at Uchana Station on the then East Punjab Railway for being carried to Siliguri on the East Indian Railway. In the second railway receipt issued by the Railway Saleghrarn Pearilal was...
Todi Investments (P.) Ltd . Vs. Income-tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-09-1982
Reported in: (1983)4ITD360(Kol.)
1. A short but interesting point has been raised in this appeal revolving round the interpretation of Sub-Section (1A) of Section 201 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act'), read with Section 194A and Rule 30, of the Income-tax Rules, 1962.2. The facts are in a very narrow compass and may be noted. The accounting year of the assessee-company for the assessment year 1979-80 ended on 31-3-1979. On 15-5-1979, its books of account were seized by the department in terms of Section 132 of the Act. Inspection of the said books was granted to the assessee-company on 10-8-1979. The appellant company took extracts from the seized books of account, and copied out accounts from the cash book and ledger and thereafter, finally adjusted its books of account sometime in September 1979 on the basis of the information gathered from the inspection of its seized books of account. The various creditors' accounts were credited with interest in September 1979. Tax under Section 194A was deducted at the ti...
Dalim Kumar SaIn and ors. Vs. Sm. Nandarani Dassi and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-08-1982
Reported in: AIR1983Cal196
S.C. Ghose, C.J.1. This appeal is directed against a judgment and decree dated Aug. 20, 1969 passed by Bijayesb Mukherjee, J. The suit was filed on July 3, 1959 by three sons and daughters of Motilal Sain who died on Nov. 4, 1955 for a declaration that the deed of mortgage dated Nov. 29, 1946 for Rs. 25,000/- and the deed of further charge dated Jan. 19, 1949 for Rs. 5,000/- executed by the defendants Sm. Nandarani Dassi in favour of India Provident Company Limited are void. The defendant No. 2 is the statutory successor of the mortgagee company. The plaintiff prayed for two ancillary reliefs -- first the aforesaid two deeds be cancelled and delivered up and second the L. I. C. be restrained by an injunction from enforcing the said two instruments of mortgages and further charge. The facts leading to the institution of the suit may be set out hereunder:January 20, 1932, Madhoo Soodan Sain created a trust on that date in respect of hisundivided 4/21st share in 116, Cotton Street, Calcut...
Sk. SaifuddIn Mondal Vs. State and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-08-1982
Reported in: 1983CriLJ109
ORDERS.N. Sanyal, J.1. Ahadali Mondal, father of the petitioner Sk. Saifuddin Mondal, filed a complaint against opposite party No. 2 Jamaluddin Ahmed, describing himself as the Secretary of the Parul Union Amjad High School alleging that opposite party No. 2 as Headmaster of the said school had committed criminal breach of trust in respect of Rs. 2,010/-. After investigation the police submitted a charge-sheet against opposite party No. 2 under Sections 408/406 of the Indian Penal Code. The accused opposite party No. 2 was on bail and the case proceeded before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Birbhum. Service of opposite party No. 2 was terminated and thereafter he appealed to the appeal committee of the West Bengal Board of Secondary Education. Before consideration of charge a prayer was made on behalf of the accused for stay of the proceeding as his appeal was pending before the appeal committee. The learned Magistrate by an order dated March 5, 1976 stayed the criminal proceeding till...
iqbal Singh Atwal Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-07-1982
Reported in: (1983)34CTR(Cal)179,[1984]147ITR599(Cal)
Suhas Chandra Sen, J.1. The facts of the case are as follows :2. The year of assessment involved is 1962-63 for which the previous year ended on December 31, 1961. During the year, the assessee, being a partner, had share income from the- firm of M/s. G.S. Atwal & Co. of Asansol. According to the ITO, the assessee had not, for the year under consideration, filed any return. He, accordingly, issued notice to him under Section 148 of the Act to file the return for the said year for making the assessment. The said notice is dated January 22, 1970. The assessee by his letter dated February 4, 1970, in reply to the said notice under Section 148 of the Act, informed the ITO that the duplicate return filed by him for that year on November 1, 1969, may be treated as a return filed by him in response to the said notice for the said year. The ITO, after issuing notice under Section 143 of the Act, computed the total income of the assessee for the year at Rs. 1,55,875. It may be mentioned that th...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Sri Hari Prosad Lohia
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-07-1982
Reported in: (1983)35CTR(Cal)232,[1983]143ITR276(Cal)
Suhas Chandra Sen, J.1. At the instance of the Revenue the two following questions of law have been referred to us by the Tribunal under Section 256(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961:'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that an appeal lies against the order of the Income-tax Officer under Section 3 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ? 2. Whether the Tribunal was right in holding that once the Income-tax Officer gave permission to change the previous year, the same permission cannot be revoked by the subsequent Income-tax Officer, having regard to the provisions of Section 3(4) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and that the revenue authorities were wrong in withdrawing the grant of change in previous years relating to the assessment years 1973-74 and 1974-75?' 2. This case relates to the assessment years 1973-74 and 1974-75. The assessee, Had Prosad Lohia, wrote a letter dated March 14, 1973, to the ITO stating that he had been following Diwali ye...
S.C. Majumdar Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-07-1982
Reported in: (1983)35CTR(Cal)202,[1983]141ITR486(Cal)
Sabyasachi Mukhakji, J.1. In this reference for the assessment year 1974-75, under Section 256(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961, the following questions of law have been referred to us :'(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was justified in law in holding that for relief under Section 23(1), second proviso, Clause (b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, each residential unit should be considered separately and the entire building cannot be considered as a whole ? (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the assessee was not entitled to claim any deduction for any of the three floors under Section 23(1), second proviso, Clause (b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?' 2. The ITO, in his assessment for the relevant assessment year, pointed out that the assessee had income from house property of which the third floor flats were occupied by the assessee, who was an individual, fro...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »