Kolkata Court April 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.
Subhas Debnath Vs. State
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-25-1984
Reported in: 1985CriLJ1373
B.C. Chakrabarti, J.1. This is an appeal against an order of conviction passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Burdwan in Sessions Trial No. 16 of 1978 convicting the appellant under Section 302, I.P.C. and sentencing him to suffer imprisonment for life.2. The appellant Subhas Debnath is the husband of the deceased Usha Debnath. Admittedly a little after they were married they separated and were living separately for about 7 1/2 years before the incident that took place on 4-3-1977. The prosecution case in brief is as follows. The accused with his parents lived at village Chakrahatpur within P. S. Purbasthali and the victim Usha after she was separated from her husband lived with her parents and brothers at a different place. P.W. 1 Shyamlal Nath is the husband of the elder sister of Usha. On 4-3-77 P.W.I along with Usha came to Chakrahatpur to meet his elder sister Suchitra Debnath. At about 3-15 P.M. P.W.I and Usha left the house of Suchitra with a view to go to Usha's father's place....
Anil Pahar Vs. Subhas Mahato and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-23-1984
Reported in: AIR1985Cal169,88CWN756
Anil K. Sen, J.1. An application raising an Election Dispute under Section 204 of the West Bengal Panchayat Act (hereinafter referred to as the said (Act)) which was registered as Misc. Case No. 69 of 1983 being dismissed by the learned Munsif, Purulia, by an order dt. Nov. 28, 1983, the applicant has challenged the said order in a revisional application. The revisional application is being heard as a contested application.2. The petitioner contested the election for the post of Chatumadar Gram Panchayat Prodhan held on Aug. 10, 1983, but on the declared result thereof lost to opposite party No. 1. On Aug. 20, 1983, the petitioner instituted the aforesaid Election Dispute case by filing an application under Section 204 of the said Act in the court of the learned Munsif, Purulia who is the tribunal constituted under the Act for adjudication of such a dispute. The opposite party appeared and raised a preliminary objection that since no notice under Section 80(1) of the Civil P.C. had bee...
R.S. Bhagat and Bros. Vs. Income-tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-19-1984
Reported in: (1984)9ITD750(Kol.)
1. This is the appeal by the assessee challenging the order of the IAC as passed under Section 271(1)(c)/ 274(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act').2. The first ground of appeal concerns with the jurisdiction of the IAC. According to the assessee, the order of the IAC is erroneous and bad in law as the IAC had no jurisdiction to pass an order under Section 271(1)(c). Briefly speaking, the facts of the case are that for the assessment year 1972-73, the ITO noted in the assessment order that the assessee is being assessed in the status of a registered firm and the method of accounting was shown as mercantile. The accounting period ended on 22-3-1972 (2028 RN). The assessment was completed under Section 143(3) read with Section 144B of the Act. The ITO amongst other things, stated that "while scrutinising the trading account, he noticed shortage of 316 bags (each containing one quintal approximately) of sugar and partial shortage in few of the bags also was noticed. He required the ...
Chandan Kumar Mukherjee Vs. Sakur Banu Mullick
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-19-1984
Reported in: AIR1984Cal236
ORDERM.N. Roy, J.1. The tenant, defendant/petitioner obtained this Rule with the corresponding interim order on 6th July 1981, against the landlord, plaintiff/opposite party for quashing and setting aside, Order No. 52dated 2nd June 1981, passed by the learned Judge. City Civil Court at Calcutta in Ejectment Suit No. 1360 of 1977 and whereby the said learned Judge has directed the defendant/petitioner to deposit Rupees 22,588,55p, towards arrears of rent, including statutory interest thereon at a monthly instalment of Rs. 500/-, apart from directing that first of such instalments will have to be paid on July 1981 and the rest in the succeeding months. Over and above such directions, the learned Judge of the Court below has directed the defendant/petitioner to go on depositing the current rents since June 1981 @ Rs. 250/- per month. Such order was made while disposing of applications under Sections 17 (2) and 17 (2A) of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1956, as filed by the defenda...
income-tax Officer Vs. Institute of Cost and Works
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-18-1984
Reported in: (1984)10ITD129(Kol.)
1. This appeal by the revenue is directed against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) dated 16-3-1981 by which he cancelled the interest charged by the ITO under Section 217 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act').2. In the original assessment for the year under appeal, the ITO did not charge interest under Section 217. Subsequently, the ITO issued a notice under Section 154 of the Act in order to rectify a mistake which, according to him, was apparent from the record. In the said notice the ITO did not state that interest under Section 217 was sought to be charged. A perusal of the order passed by the ITO under Section 154 would show that the ITO wanted to rectify his order inasmuch as he had not included certain income from the branch offices in the original assessment. The ITO after allowing the assessee an opportunity of being heard, passed an order under Section 154 by which he added a sum of Rs. 18,080 being interest income from the branch offices to the originally assessed ...
Subrata Sarkar and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-18-1984
Reported in: AIR1986Cal198,88CWN885
ORDERAmitabha Dutta, J.1. In this writ petition two shareholders of the Eastern and North-eastern Forntier Railway Co-operative Bank Limited (hereinafter referred to as the Co-operative Bank) have challenged the Notification dt. 1-3-1977 issued by the Government of West Bengal in exercise of the powers conferred by the proviso to Sub-section (1) of Section 26 of the West Bengal Co-operative Societies Act 1973, dissolving the Managing Committee of the said Co-operative Bank and appointing an Administrator to manage its affairs (Annexure 'A' to the writ petition), the Notification dt. 29-2-1980 issued by the same authority reconstituting the Board of Administrators constituted earlier to replace the Administrator (Annexure 'B' to the writ petition) and the Notification dt. 14-1-1981 also issued by the State Government reconstituting the Board of Administrators before the expiry of one year term of the then existing Board.2. The grounds of challenge as pleaded in the original writ petitio...
Sushila Hati and ors. Vs. Subhas and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-18-1984
Reported in: AIR1985Cal197
Sukumar Chakravarty, J. 1. This second appeal is directed against the judgment and decree passed by the learned Subordinate Judge, Second Court, Hooghly in Title Appeal No. 262 of 1973, setting aside the judgment and decree of dismissal passed by the learned Munsif, first court, Serampore in Title Suit No. 73 of 1971 and decreeing the suit.2. Plaintiff filed the suit for partition and injunction on a declaration of his alleged title to the suit land.3. It was the case of the plaintiff that there was one 'Baithakkhana' (parlor) consisting of two rooms situated in plot No. 1294 of Khatian No. 692 in Mouja Adan. There was a partition between plaintiffs predecessor Nibaran Hati, defendants 1 to 3, defendants 4 and 5, and defendants 7 to 10 in respect of their properties including the Baithakkhana mentioned in the Ka Schedule to the plaint. By that partition plaintiffs oredecessor Nibaran Hati and defendants 4 and 5 got the western room of the said Baithakkhana. This partitionwwas effected ...
Jayashree Textiles and Industries and ors. Vs. Collector of Central Ex ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-14-1984
Reported in: 1985(4)ECC22,1985(22)ELT708(Cal)
S.K. Mukherjee, J.1. The petitioner in this case has challenged a notice dated 12th January, 1973, issued by the Assistant Collector, Central Excise, Calcutta IV Division. By the said notice the petitioner has been asked to show cause as to why a penalty should not be imposed on it under Rules 9(2), 56A(4) and 173Q of the Central Excise Rules and as to why Central excise duty should not be demanded under Rules 9(2) and 173Q of the Central Excise Rules. To appreciate the alleged violation of the aforesaid rules committed by the petitioner, it is necessary to state certain facts leading to the issuance of the aforesaid impugned show cause notice. The petitioner manufactures cotton fabrics from cotton yarn. The said yarn is obtained from the sources (a) from open market and (b) from yarn manufactured in the petitioner's own factory. So far as the yarn obtained from open market is concerned, the petitioner was permitted to avail of the special procedure under Rule 56A of the Central Excise...
Hada Textile Industries Ltd. Vs. Income-tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-12-1984
Reported in: (1984)9ITD744(Kol.)
1. The assessee, is limited company. It was following its previous year from 1st April to 31st March in each year. The assessee wanted to change its previous year for the assessment year 1977-78. The necessary application in this regard was made on 10-9-1975 and 31-10-1975 before the ITO under Section 3(4) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act'). The ITO vide his letter dated 21-11-1975 allowed the change of previous year from 1-4-1976 to 30-6-1976 on three conditions. The first and third conditions were that depreciation as well as relief under Section 80J of the Act will be allowed pro rata. The second condition was that the assessment year 1977-78 will be considered as one assessment year for the purpose of carry forward of unabsorbed business loss, unabsorbed development rebate and unabsorbed relief under Section 80J.The assessee thereafter made a petition under Section 264 of the Act to the Commissioner and raised objections against the conditions imposed by the ITO. The Commissi...
Mir Abdul Jalil Vs. State of West Bengal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-12-1984
Reported in: AIR1984Cal200,88CWN739
Mukul Gopal Mukherji, J. 1. The plaintiff is the appellant before, this Hon'ble Court impugning the judgments and decrees of both the Court's below whereby a claim for Rupees 2149.65 p. was refused.2. It is the admitted case that the State of West Bengal had a scheme under the Small Irrigation Scheme sanctioned for re-excavating the tank on plot No. 2795 commonly known as Baradighi in mouza Bhonta under Police Station Ausgram. A total amount of Rs. 4777/- was sanctioned for the said purpose under the terms and conditions of the scheme of which the beneficiaries, would contribute 55% of the total cost of, re-excavation and the State of West Bengal would contribute 45% of the cost as grant. A works order Exhibit A was executed which reveals that the plaintiff was asked to take up the work immediately and complete the same by 30-6-1968. The said works order stipulated inter alia that tenders would be invited prior to the government share of work being undertaken and that would be so done ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »