Kolkata Court February 1984 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.
income-tax Officer Vs. G. D. SalarpuriA.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-08-1984
Reported in: [1986]17ITD617(Cal)
ORDERPer Shri Egbert Singh, Accountant Member - [Paras 1 to 6 are not reproduced here as they involve minor issues.]7. We shall now come to the cross-objections as filed by the assessee in which the only point raised was regarding the charging of interest under section 215 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act). According to the assessee there was not shortfall of payment of advance tax particularly after giving effect to the appellate order under section 251 of the Act which was at Rs. 74,959. The tax worked out to Rs. 27,971 and after considering the tax deducted at source the tax payable was at Rs. 26,651 and 75 per cent thereof worked out to Rs. 19,289. The advance tax paid was shown at Rs. 22,500. It is urged, therefore, that since there was no tax payable the question of paying interest under section 215 did not arise.8. On behalf of the revenue the learned departmental representative supports the order of the AAC who found that the assessee paid advance tax which was less than 75...
Rungta Mines (P.) Ltd. Vs. Income-tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-03-1984
Reported in: (1984)9ITD433(Kol.)
1. The assessee is a private limited company and derives income from mining. The assessee during the year under appeal wrote off railway siding amounting to Rs. 50,577. The assessee required a railway siding for its business. Accordingly, during the assessment years 1972-73 and 1973-74, earth cutting, levelling of land and construction of platform and shed were done. Subsequently, the Government of India decided to handle the entire export trade of iron ore through Minerals and Metals Trading Corporation of India Ltd., who were provided with railway line facility. Accordingly, the assessee did not get actual railway lines over the siding. However, the siding along with the platform and shed was used for the purposes of the business of the assessee. The ITO referring to Section 32(1)(m) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act'), said that the section covers only depreciable items like building, plant, machinery and furniture. It comes into operation only when the depreciation is allowed ...
Sumitra Singh Vs. Nahar Singh
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-03-1984
Reported in: AIR1984Cal145
Amitabha Dutta, J.1. This appeal by the plaintiff is from a judgment and decree of reversal passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Alipore, 24 Parga-nas and it arises out of a suit for ejectment of a tenant governed by the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1956.2. The plaintiff's case was that the defendant was a monthly tenant in the suit premises comprising shop rooms Nos. 7, 8 and 9 and a garage in municipal premises No. 16A Ashutosh Mukher-jee Road, P. S. Bhowanipur, Calcutta at a rent of Rs. 100/- per month payable according to the English Calendar month and that the defendant without the consent in writing of the plaintiff, sublet, and/or assigned a portion of the suit premises in or about March, 1972 to one Messrs. Bengal Automobile Industries (India) and to a person whose name was unknown to the plaintiff and who was running a book-stall. It was alleged that the tenancy of the defendant was terminated by a notice of ejectment which was a combined notice to quit and of...
indrajit Sinha Vs. B.L. Rathi
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-03-1984
Reported in: AIR1984Cal281,1984(2)CHN48,(1984)1CompLJ481(Cal)
ORDERPratibha Bonerjea, J.1. This is an application under Sections 10 and 151, C. P. C. for stay of an application taken out by the respondent under Section 33, Arbitration Act. The facts of this case are shortly as follows :The petitioner Indrajit Sinha alleges that there was an agreement between the parties dated 31st March, 1978 whereby the respondent Rathi became a licensee in respect of one room located on the eastern side of the top floor of premises No. 7/1, Lord Sinha Road. The agreement contains certain terms and conditions and Clause 5 of the alleged agreement contains an arbitration clause whereby the parties agreed to refer all the disputes arising out of the said agreement to the sole arbitration of Mr. R.L. Gaggar, Solicitor. This particular agreement also contains one clause, i. e. Clause 3, whereby Rathi is alleged to have agreed to vacate the portion of the room as and when desired by Indrajit Sinha calling upon him to vacate the same either verbally or in writing. Cla...
Sitaram Biyani and anr. Vs. Registrar of Companies
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-02-1984
Reported in: [1985]58CompCas870(Cal),88CWN894
N.G. Chaudhuri, J. 1. This revision petition under Section 397/401 read with Section 482, Cr. PC, is directed against order dated June 27, 1980, passed by the Judicial Magistrate, 9th Court, Alipore, in. Case No. C/813 of 1977 (T. R. No. 496 of 1977) arising out of a petition of complaint made by the Registrar of Companies, West Bengal, under Section 211(7) of the Companies Act, 1956. The petitioners before this court are two directors of a public limited company, namely, Jagadishpur Co. Ltd.2. The principal allegation made against the petitioner accused in the petition of complaint was to the effect that as per balance-sheet and profit and loss account for the financial year ending March 31, 1976, and filed in the office of the complainant, it transpired that the accounts of the company have been drawn up on cash basis; and, as such, the said accounts without adjustment of the outstanding receipts/payments did not give a true and fair view of the state of affairs of the company and, a...
Anal Chowdhury Vs. State of West Bengal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-02-1984
Reported in: [1985]151ITR804(Cal)
Borooah, J.1. The subject-matter of challenge in this Rule is the constitutional validity of the West Bengal Entertainment-cum-Amusements Tax Act, 1982 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), which came into force on and from April 1, 1983. The Act was passed by the West Bengal Legislature for raising additional resources for the benefit of the State. The 'charging provision of the Act is Section 4 which reads thus :'Subject to the other provisions elsewhere contained in this Act, there shall be levied and collected on and from every holder of a television set or sets an entertainment-cum-amusement tax at the rate of rupees fifty for each year per television set held or possessed by him : Provided that if the holder of a television set or sets becomes liable to pay the tax after the 30th day of June during a year, he shall be liable to pay during that year one-half of the amount of tax as specified above.' 2. Section 2(a) defines the holder of a television set to mean a person in whose...
Salonah Tea Co. Ltd. Vs. Income-tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-01-1984
Reported in: (1984)8ITD710(Kol.)
Merger of Inspecting Assistant Commissioner's order with that of Commissioner(Appeal's)'s, order extended only to the extent of points which were subject-matter of appeal before commissioner(Appeals)'s The assessment order of the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner, against which an appeal has been preferred before the Commissioner(Appeal's)'s, merges with the order of the Commissioner(Appeals) only in respect of those points which were subject-matter of such appeal and cannot be revised under section 263 to that extent. However, when the Commissioner(Appeal's)'s has not considered a particular matter, the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner's order cannot be deemed to have merged in respect of that matter in the order of the Commissioner(Appeal's)'s. Therefore, the Commissioner can exercise his revisionary jurisdiction in respect of the issues which were not subject-matter of such appeal.1. This appeal has been filed against an order of the Commissioner passed under Section 263 of the In...
Lakshmi Narayan Dutta Vs. Smt. Mira Rani Dey and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-01-1984
Reported in: 1984CriLJ1033
ORDERMonjula Bose, J.1. Having heard the respective contentions of the parties this Court is satisfied that there has been deliberate violation of its order passed on 23rd June, 1983 which order is more specifically set out in para 18 of the petition for contempt. The relevant part of the said order reads:So far as new construction is concerned there will be status quo as of today. The proposed, construction will not be let out in the meantime.2. The service of the said order on the respondents Nos. 1 and 2 is admitted. It is also admitted that the respondent No. 3 is the husband of respondent No. 2. From the pleadings it appears that the case of the respondents Nos. 1, 2 and 3 has been that there has been no violation of the Court's order inasmuch as all works to the building had been completed prior to the application initiated by the petitioner and on which application the said order referred to was passed. The second defence of the respondents from the pleadings appears to be that ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›