Kolkata Court January 1983 Judgments
Agents (India) Ltd. Vs. Income-tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-29-1983
Reported in: (1983)4ITD391(Kol.)
1. This is an appeal by the assessee challenging the order of the Commissioner (Appeals), by which he has sustained the order of the ITO, rejecting the claim of the assessee for setting off of business loss against income from speculation business.2. From the order of the ITO, it is seen that the assessee derives income from speculation business, apart from income from regular business and income from other sources. Before the ITO, the assessee claimed for setting off of carried forward business loss of the assessment year 1974-75 against income from speculation business earned during the assessment year. The ITO did not accept the claim as in his view the carried forward business loss could be set off only against any other business income and that as per Explanation 2 to Suction 28 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act'), the income from speculation transaction shall be deemed to be distinct and separate from any other business. Against the action of the ITO, the assessee preferred ...
Tag this Judgment!industrial Fuel Marketing Co. Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-28-1983
Reported in: AIR1983Cal253
ORDERB.C. Ray, J.1. The petitioner No. 1, Messrs. Industrial Fuel Marketing Co., a partnership firm duly registered under the Partnership Act and the petitioners Nos. 2, 3 and 4 who are the partners of the aforesaid firm have assailed in this writ application the institution of the criminal case being Petarbar P. S. Case No. 2 dated 4th April, 1982 on the ground that the said criminal proceeding was wrongly started against the petitioners and also for a mandate restraining the respondents from interfering with the petitioners right to collect sludge or slurry elected, from the coal washeries known as Kathaya Kargaji and Swang washeries belonging to the respondent No. 3, the Central Coalfields Ltd.2. The sallent facts as appear from the petition are as follows, the respondents, Central Coalfields Limited and Coal India Limited are Government Companies, previously, the National Coal Development Corporation Limited (commonly referred to as NCDC) was the Owner of Goal Washeries known as Ka...
Tag this Judgment!K.K. Nandi Vs. Amitabha Banerjee
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-28-1983
Reported in: 1983CriLJ1479
ORDERB.C. Chakrabarti, J.1. This is an application under Sections 401 and 482 of the Criminal P.C. for quashing a proceeding under Section 44 of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974, pending in the Court of the 6th Metropolitan Magistrate, Calcutta, being Case No. C/1436 of 1982 (State v. Shaw Wallance & Co. Ltd.).2. The present application is by the another accused namely, K. K. Nandi. The complaint was lodged by the Executive Engineer No. 1 of West Bengal Prevention and Control of Water Pollution Board. The petition of complaint has been made an annexure to the application. The principal allegations set out in the said petition may be stated thus:The accused No. 1 namely, the company is carrying on the business of manufacturing brewar in its factory at Bhadrakali in the District of Hooghly and the accused No. 2 (the petitioner herein) is the manager of the company and is responsible for the day to day work of the factory. Under the provisions of the Water (Preven...
Tag this Judgment!Crescent Dyes and Chemicals Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-25-1983
Reported in: (1984)38CTR(Cal)365
: Suhas Chandra Sen, J. - We have considered the facts of this as stated by the Tribunal. In view of the real controversy between the parties the question that has been referred to is reframed as under :'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in upholding the disallowance of interest of Rs. 1,42,191 for the assessment year 1971-72 ?'2. It appears from the facts of this case that the assessee had an overdraft account with National & Grindlays Bank Ltd, and from Schedule A to the assessment order it appears that the assessee was depositing every month more than what it was paying by way of tax. In view of the judgments of this court in the cases of Woolcombers of India v. CIT and Reckitt and Colman of India Ltd. v. CIT this question is answered in the negative and in favour of the assessee.3. In the facts and circumstances of the case, there will be no order as to costs.Sabyasachi Mukharji, J. - I agree....
Tag this Judgment!Union of India (Uoi) Vs. Subodh Kumar
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-21-1983
Reported in: 1984CriLJ367
N.G. Chaudhuri, J.1. This appeal at the instance of Union of India represented by the Assistant Collector of Customs, West Bengal, is directed against the order of acquittal dated 30-11-1976 under Section 135 of the Customs Act, 1962, passed in Case No. C/2019 of 1969 by the Metropolitan Magistrate, 4th Court, Calcutta. The prosecution case was that at the material time accused Subodh Kumar Mehta was a tenant in respect of room No. 25 in premises No. 150A, Lower Chitpore Road, Calcutta. On receipt of secret information regarding storage of wrist watches of foreign origin in the aforesaid room, the Customs Officers under authority of search order issued by Assistant Collector of Customs went to search the room. The raiding party after keeping watch on the room for sometime caused the padlock of the said room to be opened on 22-11-1966 in the presence of the Police Officers, representative of the landlord and independent witnesses, searched the room and recovered 329 pieces of wrist watc...
Tag this Judgment!New Central Jute Mills Co. Ltd. Vs. Veb Deutfracht Seereederei Rostock ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-20-1983
Reported in: AIR1983Cal225
Sabyasachi Mukharji, J. 1. This is an appeal from the judgment delivered and order passed by the learned trial Judge on 3rd of Feb., 1982. It appears that the plaintiff is the consignee of certain goods covered by the Bill of Lading. It would be necessary to appreciate the questions in this case, to refer to certain facts.2. On or about 20th of June, 1979 the plaintiff who is the appellant here duly purchased divers spare parts and accessories for the M. G, Compressor at its ammonia plant from one Neuman & Esser, Federal Republic of Germany. It is not necessary to set out the details of the goods. It is further the case of the appellant that it duly paid the said purchase price of the said goods and became the owner thereof and the property therein according to the appellant duly passed to the appellant. It is also not necessary to set out the details of the price of the goods.3. In the suit the plaintiff has come up in appeal 'making the first defendant viz. VEB Deutfracht Seereederei...
Tag this Judgment!Grindlays Bank Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-18-1983
Reported in: [1984]145ITR119(Cal)
Suhas Chandra Sen, J. 1. The assessment year involved in this case is 1973-74 for which the previous year ended on March 31, 1973. In the year under consideration M/s. Rallis International Ltd., a non-resident company, held 25,000 shares of its subsidiary company known as Oriental Carpet ., Amritsar. It appears that some time prior to December 29, 1970, M/s. Rallis International Ltd. decided to sell the said shares. For the said sale M/s. Grindlays Bank Ltd. acted as an agent on behalf of M/s. Rallis International Ltd. The ITO passed an order dated March 29, 1974, under Section 163(1)(c) of the Act declaring the assessee as an agent of the said non-resident company, M/s. Rallis International Ltd.2. The assessee challenged the said assessment of the ITO before the AAC and one of the grounds raised therein was that interest under Section 139(8) of the Act should not have been charged. The AAC set aside the order of the ITO in the matter of charging of interest under Section 139(8) of the...
Tag this Judgment!Hooghly Docking and Engineering Co. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner, Commercial ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-17-1983
Reported in: [1983]53STC198(Cal)
Sabyasachi Mukharji, J.1. In this reference under Section 21(1) of the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941, the following questions have been referred to this Court :(1) Whether or not upon a true and proper construction of the relevant terms of the contract and in the admitted facts of the case, the inter-State movement of the components (valued at Rs. 4,27,200) was the result of a covenant or incident of the contract of sale ?(2) If, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the inter-State movement of the components from West Bengal to Kashmir constituted inter-State sale within the meaning of Section 3(a) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 ?(3) If the sale should be deemed to take place inside Kashmir in view of what is contained in Section 4 of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 ?(4) If, in the event of any conflict between Sections 3 and 4 of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, the provisions of Section 3 should prevail 2. The assessee is a registered dealer and the relevant assessm...
Tag this Judgment!Shree Govind Property and Vs. Income-tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-14-1983
Reported in: (1983)5ITD390(Kol.)
1. These two appeals arise out of a common order dated 23-3-1981 of the Commissioner (Appeals) and are, therefore, disposed of by this single order.2. Both these matters related to penalties levied by the ITO under Section 273(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act'). For the first year, i.e., 1974-75 the ITO issued a notice presumably on the ground that the assessee had not paid any advance tax. In response to the show-cause notice the assessee's representative contended that there was a claim for refund to the tune of Rs. 1,58,180 which if duly considered would result in a case of no liability. The ITO, however, held that this contention was not acceptable as the assessee had failed to pay advance tax without any reasonable cause. He, therefore, levied a penalty of Rs. 5,387. For the next year the ITO noticed that the assessee was served with a notice under Section 210 of the Act asking for payment of advance tax to the tune of Rs. 2,87,090. It filed an estimate in Form No. 29 sho...
Tag this Judgment!Sm. Umarani Sen and ors. Vs. Sudhir Kumar Datta and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-14-1983
Reported in: AIR1984Cal230
Chittatosh Mookerjee, J.1. This second appeal is at the instance of the plaintiffs in a suit for recovery of Rs. 7086.44 p. as damages from the defendant Nos. 1 and 2. The learned Additional Subordinate Judge, Balurghat and decreed the suit in favour of the plaintiff. The defendant No. 1's appeal was allowed by the learned Additional District Judge, West Dinajpore and the suit in question was dismissed.2. the plaintiff's claim in the plaint was that they carried on business jointly under the trade name, Jaidurga Transport Company. The lower appellate court has found that the plaintiffs were members of an unregistered partnership firm. They were not the owners of the goods, which in pursuance of an alleged contract between the plaintiffs and the defendant No. 1 were made over, at Calcutta, for carriage by the defendant's truck and delivery at plaintiffs branch office at Raigunj. At the time of the delivery of the said consignment, 16 packages were not delivered on the ground that they w...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »