Kolkata Court March 1983 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.
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Kalicharan Agarwalla and Co.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-21-1983
Reported in: [1984]146ITR634(Cal)
Suhas Chandra Sen, J.1. The Tribunal has referred the following questions of law under Section 256(2) of the I.T. Act, 1961:'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal had any evidence to hold that the penalty, under Section 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act, 1961, was imposed by the IAC on an altogether different charge than that on which the ITO had initiated the penalty proceedings and whether such finding was otherwise unreasonable or perverse ? 2. Without prejudice to question No. 1, whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in view of the fact that the assessee had disclosed an incorrect figure of closing stock while filing the original return of income and on a correct interpretation of the Explanation to Section 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act, 1961, there was any onus on the Department to prove that the assessee had concealed its income or had furnished inaccurate particulars of such income ? 3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumsta...
Gofur Shiekh and anr. Vs. the State
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-18-1983
Reported in: 1984CriLJ559
Jitendra Nath Chaudhuri, J.1. These two appeals being Crl. App. No. 421 of 1979, Gofur Sk. v. State and Crl. App. No. 495 of 1979.Panchanan Kahar alias Pacha Kahar v. State were heard together as they arose out of orders of conviction under Section 396 of the Penal Code and sentences of life imprisonment passed in Sessions Trial No. 2 of July. 1979 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Murshidabad.2. Originally in that joint trial two other accused namely. Sohorab Sk. and Israfil Sk. were also charged under Section 396 of the Penal Code and one Dhiren. Raibansi and one Ainal Haque were charged each under Section 412 of the penal Code for possession of articles arising out of the dacoity. Excepting the two present appellants all others have been acquitted of the respective charges levelled against thorn.3. The charge against each of the present appellants reads as follows:That you, on or about the 25th day of June. 1974 at village Kodla under P.S. Berhampore along with 20/22 persons...
Gopal Chandra Pal and ors. Vs. State of West Bengal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-18-1983
Reported in: 1983CriLJ1540
P.C. Borooah, J.1. The petitioners are the partners of Sree Lakshmi Oil Mill at Kethardanga within the District of Bankura.2. On 17-12-81 the police raided the petitioners' firm and seized several quintals of mustard seed, mustard oil and oil cake. Pursuant to the seizure a case was instituted under Section 7(1)(a)(ii) of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (hereafter referred to as the Act) for violation of the provisions of para 3 (2) of the West Bengal Declaration of Stocks and Prices of Essential Commodities Order 1977 as well as para 3 (1) of the West Bengal Pulses, Edible Oil Seeds and Edible Oils (Dealers Licensing) Order, 1978. Thereafter confiscation proceedings were started before the Magistrate, Bankura, who was the Collector, under the provisions of Section 6~A of the Act, and the Collector by an order dated 30-8-82 directed confiscation of the seized goods and further ordered that the I. O. would arrange the sale of the goods at a fair price and keep the sale proceeds in d...
State of Orissa Vs. Goenka Investment and Mining Industries Pvt. Ltd. ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-17-1983
Reported in: AIR1983Cal438,[1985]58CompCas325(Cal),87CWN627
Anil K. Sen, J. 1. This is a revi-sional application at the instance of the defendant, the State of Orissa (hereinafter referred to as the defendant) and is directed against an order dated June 10, 1982, passed by the learned Subordinate Judge, 1st Court, Alipore, in Money Suit No. 18 of 1978. By the order impugned, the learned Subordinate Judge has decided a preliminary issue on the point of court's jurisdiction to try the suit.2. Goenka Investment and Mining Industries Private Limited, a Company incorporated, under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as the plaintiff) instituted the aforesaid suit claiming a decree for a sum of Rs. 2,82,97,355.62 by way of damages and alternatively claiming an enquiry into the damages suffered by them and for a decree for such sum as may be found due on such enquiry. The plaintiff's case shortly is that by an agreement dated July 15, 1971, the defendant appointed the plaintiff an agent for mining, getting and raising co...
West Bengal Head Masters' Association and Anr. Vs. Union of India (UOi ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-17-1983
Reported in: AIR1983Cal448,87CWN597
M.M. Dutt, J.1. This appeal has been preferred by the West Bengal Head Masters' Association and the West Bengal Guardians' Association against the judgment of a learned Judge of this Court whereby the learned Judge discharged the Rule Nisi issued on the application of the appellants under Article 226 of the Constitution. The question involved in this appeal is whether the revised History Syllabus for class VIII introduced by the West Bengal Board of Secondary Education, hereinafter referred to as the Board, with effect from January 1983 is valid or not.2. According to the appellants, in the State of West Bengal, there are two types of schools -- one under the Central Board of Education, New Delhi and the other under the West Bengal Board of Secondary Education. The syllabi of the two groups are different, but both of them are in conformity with the syllabus as framed by the National Council of Educational Research and Training, hereinafter referred to as NCERT, an autonomous body under...
Sm. Binapani Basu Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-16-1983
Reported in: AIR1984Cal258,87CWN520
Anil K. Sen, J.1. An application under Section 16(3), Telegraph Act, 1885 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) which had been registered as Misc. Case No. 103 of 1980 was dismissed by the learned District Judge, Howrah by his order dated August 28, 1982. It was so dismissed not on merits but on the technical ground that such an application was not maintainable in law. Feeling aggrieved, the applicant has moved the present revisional application challenging the said order. The application is being heard on contest by the respondent the Union of India.2. In laying her claim for compensation under Section 16(3) of the Act, the applicantmade out a case that the telegraph authorities were engaged in pulling and connecting telephone wire from a telephone post situate on the south of the dwelling house of the applicant at Andul Daspara Road to a brick built piller set up for the said purpose at the subscriber's premises on an adjoining plot on August 26, 1977. The said wire was being drawn an...
Purnasree Cinema Vs. Income-tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-14-1983
Reported in: (1983)5ITD592(Kol.)
1. This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) dated 6-3-1981 by which he directed the ITO to treat the status of the assessee as that of an AOP rejecting its claim that it was a genuine firm. One Shri Purna Chandra Barick, by his own effort had built up a cinema house at 2/IB, Raja Raj Kissen Street, Calcutta in the name of Purnasree Cinema. On 20-9-1961 this business was converted into a partnership, Shri Purna Chandra Barick having 10 shares and his grandson, Shri Netai Chandra Barick the remaining 6 shares. Under Clause 17 of the deed of partnership, if a partner desires to retire he should give at least six calendar months' notice in writing to the other partner. Clause 18, which is more relevant, stipulated that if any of the partners died during the continuance of the partnership, the partnership should not be dissolved but the heirs and legal representatives of the deceased partner at their option were entitled to be taken in as part...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Usha MartIn Black (Wire Ropes) Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-14-1983
Reported in: (1983)36CTR(Cal)207,[1984]148ITR236(Cal)
Suhas Chandra Sen, J.1. The Tribunal has referred the following two questions of law under Section 256(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961 :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and on a proper construction of the terms of the agreement dated July 2, 1973, the Tribunal misdirected itself in law in holding that there was no 'business connection' of M/s. Martin Black & Company (Wire Ropes) Ltd. (U.K.) in India or whether the said finding of the Tribunal was perverse ? 2. If the answer to question No. (1) is in the affirmative, then whether the Tribunal was right in holding that the amount of royalty paid by the assessee-company to M/s. Martin Black & Company (Wire Ropes) Ltd. (U.K.) was not assessable to tax in India under s. 9(1)(i) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?' 2. The relevant facts have been set out in the statement of case which are as follows :3. The assessee-company submitted an application under Section 195 dated May 24, 1974, to the ITO, ' B ' Ward, Companies Dist...
Sudhindra Coomar Vs. Monmohini Coomar and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-10-1983
Reported in: 1983(2)CHN192,(1983)1CompLJ163(Cal),[1983]143ITR264(Cal)
Anil K. Sen, J. 1. This is a revisional application at the instance of the plaintiff and is directed against an order dated March 15, 1982, passed by the learned Subordinate Judge, 9th Court, Alipore, deciding two preliminary issues against the plaintiff. The plaintiff, who is one of the sons of Benoypada Kumar, filed the aforesaid suit for partition and accounts against his mother, defendant No. 1, and his other brothers and sisters, who were the other defendants. The subject-matter involved included several immovable properties and businesses. In claiming partition by inheritance from Benoy, the plaintiff pleaded that Benoy in his lifetime in order to defraud the creditors and the Income-tax Department caused a falseand collusive proceedings to be started under the Arbitration Act, in collusion with defendant No. 1. In that proceeding, the defendant No. 1 raised a sham dispute based on a sham claim and obtained a fictitious award and a decree passed thereon in Title Suit No. 87 of 19...
Om Prakash and anr. Vs. the State
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-10-1983
Reported in: 1983CriLJ1151
B.C. Chakrabarti, J.1. This is an application under Section 482 of the Criminal P.C. for quashing an order dated 10-7-1980 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Alipore in Criminal Motion No. 122 of 1980 reversing an order of discharge of the petitioners under Section 239- of the Criminal P.C.2. An information was lodged by one Dr. Noreen Minos alleging snatching away of gold neckchain from her person at about 9.15 p. m. on 4-10-1978 while she was returning home in the first floor of premises No. F 41. Garden Reach Road, Calcutta. On the basis of the said information, case No. 231 dated ?-10-1978 was started. The two petitioners surrendered in court on 7-10-1978. The learned Magistrate by his order dated 12-5-1980 held that there was no prima facie case against the two accused persons: and accordingly they were discharged under Section 239 of the Cr. P.C.3. Being aggrieved, the complainant filed a revisional application which was disposed of by the order impugned in the pres...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »