Kolkata Court August 1985 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.
Todi Properties Ltd. Vs. Income-tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-06-1985
Reported in: (1985)14ITD119(Kol.)
1. This is a miscellaneous application by the assessee stating that in the assessee's Appeal Nos. 657 and 658 (Cal.) of 1983, which was directed against the order of the Commissioner under Section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act'), the assessee raised the point that the assessments having been made in pursuance of the direction of the IAC under Section 144B of the Act, Section 263 could not be invoked in respect of such assessments. Hence, the orders of the Commissioner under Section 263 were without any authority.2. We have heard both the sides and have perused the orders of the Tribunal on the appeal by the assessee as well as on the first miscellaneous application being Miscellaneous Application No. 125 (Cal.) of 1984. It is seen that the Tribunal noted that such point was raised by the assessee in the grounds of appeal before it. But in its order dated 18-5-1984, on the appeal by the assessee, at paragraph No.7, it has been mentioned that at the time of hearing, ground N...
In Re: Abani Kanta Pal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-06-1985
Reported in: AIR1986Cal143,89CWN1158
M.M. Dutt, J. 1. This application under Section 115 of the Civil P.C. filed at the instance of the plaintiff is directed against Order No. 108 dt Nov. 19, 1984 of the learned Assistant District Judge, Bankura passed by him in Title Suit No. 34 of 1973. 2. The said suit has been filed by the plaintiff for a declaration that he is a partner of a partnership firm having one-fourth share therein and carrying on business of the husking mill in question. He has also prayed for appointment of a Commissioner for accounts and for other incidental reliefs. 3. The defendants opposite parties entered appearance in the suit and contested the same by filing a written statement. It was inter alia contended by them that the husking mill in question was owned and possessed by the opposite party 1 and the petitioner and the opposite parties 2 and 3 had no right, title and interest in the said husking mill business. 4. While arguments were being advanced by the parties at the first hearing of the suit, t...
Sukumar Adhikary and ors. Vs. State of West Bengal and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-05-1985
Reported in: AIR1986Cal261
ORDERMukul Gopal Mukherji, J.1. The dispute centres around a plot of land in dag No. 1382 of mouza Rajarampur within Police Station Sutahata, The respondents Nos. 3 and 4 were admittedly big raiyats. They did not retain the disputed ands in the return they submitted before the Estates Acquisition Authorities. One Saday Kumar Mondal purchased the said plot by two different registered kobalas dated 17th April, 1966 believing on the representation of the respondents Nos. 3 and 4 that the names of the alleged vendors were shown in the finally published record of rights and they did retain the said lands and were otherwise authorised and competent to effect the sale. Saday Kumar Mondal in his turn paid rent to the State Government which are Annexures A1 and A2 to the writ application. By different kobal as dated 5th May 1968 and 1st June 1968 Saday Kumar Mondal sold the said land to the petitioners for a valuable consideration andsince then the petitioners are in continuous possession of th...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Dhaniram GuptA.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-05-1985
Reported in: (1986)52CTR(Cal)44
Dipak Kumar Sen, J. - Dhaniram Gupta the assessee, was assessed to income-tax in the status of an individual for the asst. yr. 1966-67, the corresponding accounting year ending on the 31-12-1965. The assessee claimed to be a partner of a firm named M/s. Dhaniram Gupta & Co. constituted by and between the assessee and one Kian Tan under a Deed dt. 20-11-1956.2. The ITO found that on the same day another Deed had been executed amongst Kian Gwan Co. (Cal) Private Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the company, the assessee and the said Kian Tan recording that the company will be the real partner in the firm and Kian Tan, would represent the company in the partnership.3. The ITO further found inter alia that -(a) Only the Deed of partnership had been registered with the Registrar of firms.(b) Purushottamdass Bhiwaniwalla, the brother and Fatechand Bhiwaniwalla the father of the assessee were authorised to operate the Bank account of the firm.(c) The assessee held 539 out of a total of 830 sh...
Tata Oil Mills Co. Ltd. Vs. Lokenath Chemical Works
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-02-1985
Reported in: AIR1987Cal13
ORDERAjit Kumar Sengupta, J. 1. This suit was instituted by the plaintiff, the Tata Oil Mills Co. Ltd., against M/s. Lokenath Chemical Works on 9th Dec. 1964, inter alia, praying for leave under Clause 12 of the Letters Patent and claiming perpetual injunction restraining the defendant by themselves or by their agents and servants from infringing the plaintiff's registered design mentioned in paras 2 and 3 of the plaint and in Annexure 'A' and 'B' thereto and from in any way applying the plaintiff's said registered design or any fraudulent or obvious imitation thereof to any article or goods not belonging to or manufactured by the plaintiff or publishing or exposing or causing to be published or exposed for sale any articles or goods with any design infringing the plaintiff's said registered design or any fraudulent or obvious imitation thereof: damages as claimed in para 9 of the plaint in the alternative an enquiry as to the damages and a decree for the sum found due; delivery up of ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›