Kolkata Court June 1984 Judgments
Ashoke Kumar Das Vs. Income-tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-28-1984
Reported in: (1984)10ITD547(Kol.)
1. The assessee is an individual and filed the original return on 5-3-1981. The return was filed by the legal heir of Shri C.R. Das. Shri C.R. Das died on 23-1-1979 in a motor accident on spot while going to another business place at Kalyani. The accident occurred near Haringhata. Due to his sudden death, the filing of return was belated and in the original return there were some omissions like interest on loan, etc. The return was revised and was filed on 25-2-1982. The assessment was completed on 29-3-1982. The ITO did not treat the return filed on 25-2-1982 as a revised return. The ITO was of the opinion that the original return was not filed by the assessee either under Section 139(1) or under Section 139(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act') and, therefore, the return filed by the assessee cannot be taken as a return under Section 139(5).2. The assessee took the matter before the Commissioner (Appeals) and the Commissioner (Appeals), after quoting the provisions of Section 1...
Tag this Judgment!In Re: Ganesh Trading Co. Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-27-1984
Reported in: AIR1985Cal37,88CWN938
Anil K. Sen, J. 1. This is a revisional application at the instance of the opposite party in a distress proceeding under the Presidency Small Cause Courts Act, being Distress Case No. 120 of 1983 of the 4th Bench of the Court of Small Causes, Calcutta. The order impugned is one dated 14-1-1984, passed by the learned Judge, 4th Bench, overruling an objection to the distress preferred by the opposite party under Section 60 of the said Act. The facts are not in dispute and the point involved is one of question of law. 2. The petitioner before the Court of Small Causes, Calcutta, Messrs. Manton & Company Limited was a lessee in respect of premises No. 13/3, Old Court House Street, Calcutta. The lessee suffered an order for eviction passed by the Tribunal constituted under the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act dated 18-3-1976. An appeal preferred by the lessee against the said order of eviction under Section 9 of the said Act succeeded when the learned Chief Judge, Ci...
Tag this Judgment!State of West Bengal Vs. Musst. Nurjahan Sakil and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-27-1984
Reported in: AIR1985Cal39,88CWN953
B.C. Ray, J. 1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree passed in LRA Case No. 25 of 1969 (VI on 11th Aug 1982 by Sri A. K. Chakraborty, 3rd Additional Special Judge. Alipore, allowing the application for reference and fixing the value of the acquired lands at Rs. 2500/- per cottah irrespective of the belts at the flat rate. The valuation of the structures has been fixed at Rs. 1,42,000/-. 2. The aforesaid reference case has arisen in respect of an application made under the West Bengal Land Development and Planning Act 1948 for regularisation of Sanwar Squatters Colony Project in Mouza Kalidaha, P. S. Dum Dum for settlement of immigrants. The Notification under Section 4 of the said Act was published on 1st Aug. 1957 and the declaration in respect of the said lands was published on 14-2-62 and the award was made by the Collector, 24 Parganas in Case No. L. A. (Rehab) 8 of 1956-57 on 3-12-62 and the possession of the land was taken on 31-12-62. In the award made by the ...
Tag this Judgment!Mahabir Prosad Lohia Vs. Karam Chand Thapar and Bros. Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-27-1984
Reported in: AIR1985Cal209
ORDERPadma Khastgir, J.1. Karam Chand Thapar & Bros. Ltd. moved this application for an order allowing the amendment of the plaint and also for addition of parties. Mahabir Prosad Lohia filed this suit against the petitioner claiming recovery of vacant and peaceful possession of the demised premises at No. 13, India Exchange Place, Calcutta decree for mesne profits, interest and costs.2. By an indenture of lease dated 1st of Dec., 1960 a lease was granted in favour of Karam Chand Thapar & Bros. Ltd. The period fixed under the said lease had expired as a result it had come to an end by efflux of time. Thereafter the petitioner made an application on 5th of Oct., 1983 for leave to deposit the arrears of rent in instalments. Since this application it was the case of the petitioner that he had come to know from One Tulsi Charan Deb, the material facts regarding the suit premises No. 13, India Exchange Place, Calcutta. The said premises originally belonged to one Rai Bhupati Nath Deb Bahadu...
Tag this Judgment!State of West Bengal Vs. Rash Behari Sarkar
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-27-1984
Reported in: 1984(2)CHN78,88CWN1002,[1985]155ITR281(Cal)
U.C. Bankejee, J.1. This appeal is against an ex parte order of injunction granted by A.K. Janah J. (as he then was) on the writ petition of respondents Nos. 1 and 2, directing an order of injunction restraining the State Government from giving any effect to the notification being No. 1042-F.T. dated March 31, 1984, issued under Section 8 of the Bengal Amusement Tax Act, 1922.2. The principal question that arises in this appeal as also in the writ petition, which was also taken up for hearing on the joint prayer of the parties along with the appeal, is whether the notification dated March 31, 1984, is violative of the constitutional safeguards under Article 14 of the Constitution or not.3. Mr. Ajit Kumar Panja, the learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioner, contended that the impugned notification is discriminatory in nature and has treated equals unequally. Mr. Panja contended that the classification made by the State Government is wholly unwarranted and unauthorised and the c...
Tag this Judgment!Jagat Jiban Lahiri and Etc. Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-26-1984
Reported in: AIR1985Cal140,89CWN23
ORDERP.C. Borooah, J. 1. The petitioners in these two Rules are Mr. Jagat Jiban Lahiri alias J. J. Lahiri and Mr. Gostha Behari Banerjee. Both are Solicitors and Advocates of this Hon'ble Court. They had been granted licences to practise as Notaries by the State of West Bengal under Section 3 of the Notaries Act, 1951 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). Both of them applied for renewal of their licences but the State Government refused to renew the licences. Hence these applications.2. In the case of Mr. Lahiri an order was communicated to him by a letter dated 8-11-83, copy of which is Annexure 'C to his petition, and in the case of Mr. Gostha Behari Banerjee the relevant order is in a letter dated 20-12-83, copy of which is included in Annexure 'H' of his petition. In both these orders no reasons have been given by the Judicial Department of the Govt. of West Bengal as to why their licences were not being renewed.3. 1 have heard Mr. Lahiri in person and Mr. Ashok Banerjee on behalf...
Tag this Judgment!Kartick Chandra Kapat Vs. Amulya Charan Kapat (Deceased by Lrs) and or ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-22-1984
Reported in: AIR1986Cal185
Manasnath Roy, J.1. This appeal from appellate decree, is directed against the judgment and decree dated 18th March 1975 and 7th April 1975, made in Title Appeal No. 501 of 1974 by the learned Subordinate Judge, 4th Court, Alipore reversing thereby the judgment and decree dated 25th February 19 4, passed in Title Suit No. 68 of 1968 by the learned Munsif, 6th Court, Alipore.2. The concerned suit was one for declaration and injunction and was filed on 7th February 1968, wherein the claim of the plaintiff was that the suit land and other lands belonged to defendants Nos. 1 and 2 and by a Registered Deed of partition dated 7th September 1962, between them, the suit property along with other properties were allotted to the defendant No. 2, Kamalesh Kapat and since then, he was in exclusive possession of them. It was further stated that by Kobala dated 5th December 1962, the defandants Nos 3 and 4 purchased the property in suit from the said defendant No. 2, with a condition for reconveyanc...
Tag this Judgment!Dr. Mahendra Chandra Bhattacharjee Vs. Abani Bhusan Bhattacharjee and ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-20-1984
Reported in: AIR1985Cal108,1984(2)CHN57,88CWN981
Anil K. Sen, J. 1. An order dated November 22, 1982, passed by the Rent Controller, Calcutta, dismissing an application under Section 29B, West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act (hereinafter referred to as the said Act), which was registered as Eviction Case No. 4/81, is the subject matter of challenge in this revisional application. The applicant before the Rent Controller (hereinafter referred to as the plaintiff) is the petitioner before us and the application is being contested by the opposite party 2 (hereinafter referred to as defendant 2).2. According to the plaintiff, he purchased flat No. 2, Block 'D', at premises No. 58/3, Ballygunge Circular Road, Calcutta, from a Co-operative Society in terms of an agreement. For effecting such a purchase he paid a sum of nearly Rs. 61,000.00 and incurred a loan to the tune of Rs. 50,000.00 from the Co-operative Society which was to be repaid on instalments. Plaintiff's further case is that after such purchase but before he could take delivery of...
Tag this Judgment!Goswami Malti Vahuji Maharaj Vs. Purushottam Lal Poddar
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-20-1984
Reported in: AIR1984Cal297
Pratibha Bonnerjea, J.1. In 1907, the suit property, premises No. 6, Kanulal Lane belonged to one Goswamini Shree Radha Vahuji Maharaj and one Shree Giridharilalji Maharaj jointly having undivided half share each therein. Radha Vahuji by a registered deed of lease dated 9-10-1907 leased out her half undivided share in the said property to one Gordhandas Poddar for 51 years from 1-9-1907.2. By two separate registered deeds of lease dated 9-10-1907 and 19-12-1908 respectively, Giridharilalji also leased out his undivided half share in the said premises to the same Gordhandas Poddar for 51 years from 1-9-1907. Thus Gordhandas became the lessee in respect of the entire premises No. 6, Kanulal Lane. Giridharilalji died on 6-12-1908 leaving his last will and testament whereby he appointed his wife Sm. Krishna Priya as the executrix. Probate of this will was duly obtained on 7-3-1973. Pursuant to the authority given under the said will, Krishna Priya adopted Govardhaneshji on 14-12-1946. Kris...
Tag this Judgment!In Re: Combust Technic P. Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-18-1984
Reported in: [1986]60CompCas872(Cal)
Dipak Kumar Sen, J. 1. The material facts on record leading up to this application under Sections 397 and 398 of the Companies Act, 1956, are as follows:Combust Technic P. Ltd. (hereafter referred to as 'the company') was incorporated on or about November 30, 1977, with the object, inter alia, to acquire the existing business of 'Combust Technic', a partnership firm of Sukhendu Blkash Sarkar and Sourendra Nath Pal, as a going concern and to take over its assets and liabilities.2. After its incorporation, the company has been carrying on the business of the said partnership, being designing and manufacturing for fabrication and repair of engineering equipments. The company owns and runs a factory at the Kidderpbre Industrial Estate, Hide Road Extension, Calcutta,3. The authorised capital of the company is Rs. 1,00,000 divided into 100 equity shares of the face value of Rs. 1,000 each. The amount of share capital paid up or credited as paid up is Rs. 30,000.4. Ajit Kumar Roy, the petitio...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »