Kolkata Court October 1986 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. General Electric Co. of India Ltd.
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-30-1986
Reported in: (1987)20ITD12(Kol.)
1. By this application under Section 254(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act') the department seeks rectification in the order of the Tribunal in IT Appeal Nos. 1333 and 1456 (Cal.) of 1982 dated 11-10-1984 on the ground that there has been glaring mistake in the said order.2. In IT Appeal No. 1383 (Cal.) of 1982 the department and in IT Appeal No. 1456 (Cal.) of 1982 the assessee challenged the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) to the extent it went against respectively each of them. At the hearing of these appeals it was noticed that the assessment order out of which the impugned order of the Commissioner (Appeals) arose was set aside by the Commissioner under Section 263 of the Act and, therefore, both the appeals were treated as infructuous.3. Now it has been pointed out by the learned departmental representative that the Commissioner bad set aside the assessment order under Section 263 only on the point of allowability of gratuity liability and on no other point whereas th...
Subol Kumar Chandra Vs. Assistant Controller of Estate
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-23-1986
Reported in: (1986)19ITD853(Kol.)
1. Appeal of the accountable person before the Appellate Controller was posted for hearing on 16-5-1984 for which he applied for an adjournment. The Appellate Controller observed as under : I however find that the signature on the application for adjournment signed as Subol Kumar Chandra is evidently different from the signature filed with Forms ED-9 and 9A and also the enclosure. It is, therefore, evident that there has been impersonation either in the application which has been filed for adjournment of the appeal which has been filed. I remand the appeal to the Assistant Controller to verify all these together and find out as to whether the appeal is filed by wrong person or that the application has been filed by the wrong person and find out the reason and notices for what is evidently an impersonation. The Assistant Controller is also directed to take my file from this office for conducting the necessary matters.The appeal was thus disposed of. Aggrieved by the said order of the A...
income-tax Officer Vs. Manoj Kumar Chatterjee
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-23-1986
Reported in: (1987)21ITD19(Kol.)
1. This departmental appeal and cross-objection of the assessee thereto against the order of the AAC relating to the assessment year 1973-74, arise under these facts and circumstances.2. The assessee for the purpose of taking out and selling sand purchased lands and right to take out sand from some other lands for certain period and also took certain lands on lease for the same purpose by entering into seven transactions and thereby incurred expenditure of Rs. 2,19,998, during the accounting period from 1-4-1972 to 31-3-1973 relevant to the assessment year 1973-74. After taking out and selling sand from those lands he valued the cost of the lands together with his right to take out sand at Rs. 2,06,000 at the end of the accounting year and thus claimed the difference of Rs. 13,998 as revenue expenditure. In the opinion of the ITO it was capital expenditure. He, therefore, disallowed the same and added (it) back to the profit of the assessee. The assessee took up the appeal before the ...
Estate of Baijnath Jalan Vs. Assistant Controller of Estate
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-01-1986
Reported in: (1987)20ITD102(Kol.)
1. This appeal has been filed by the accountable person against the order dated 7-3-1984 of the Appellate Controller by which he reduced the penalty of Rs. 16,000 imposed by the Assistant Controller under Section 73(5) of the Estate Duty Act, 1953 ('the Act') to Rs. 13,000.2. The Assistant Controller imposed the penalty of Rs. 16,000 for nonpayment of duty under Section 73(5). The accountable person appealed to the Appellate Controller and urged that sufficient opportunity to explain his case was not afforded. It was explained before the Appellate Controller that an appeal has been filed before the Tribunal against the estate duty assessment order and that full relief was expected so that there was no necessity to pay any estate duty. The Appellate Controller observed that the above ground taken by the accountable person was not sufficient reason for not paying the estate duty which had been legally imposed after due assessment. However, in view of some reduction of duty by an order o...
G.M., Ongc, Sibsagar, Assam and ors. Vs. Raj Engg. Corporation
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-01-1986
Reported in: AIR1987Cal165
ORDERSankar Bhattacharyya, J. 1. This revisional application raises a short but important question for determination.2. Pursuant to a tender issued by the Joint Director (Stores and Purchases), Oil & Natural Gas Commission ('ONGC' for short), Shibsagar (Assam), the opposite party submitted a quotation for supply of certain materials. The quotation was accepted and an order was placed for supply of 50mm H. P. Valves.3. Alleging that the above materials were duly supplied but the petitioners, who are all officers of the ONGC, neither returned the materials nor paid the price thereof, the opposite party instituted a suit being Title Suit. No. 254 of 1979 in the 3rd Court of the learned Munsif at Howrah, for certain declarations and recovery of the price of the materials supplied.4. The suit was contested by the petitioners by filing a written statement alleging, inter alia, that the court had no territorial jurisdiction to try the suit. Several issues were raised of which, Issue No. 3 was...
Konnagar Samabaya Bank Ltd. Vs. Nilmoni Banerjee and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-01-1986
Reported in: [1988]63CompCas787(Cal),91CWN1112
Mookerjee, J.1. The application under article 227 of the Constitution has been filed by the petitioner bank which is a society registered under the Bengal Co-operative Societies Act, 1940, which has since been replaced by the West Bengal Co-operative Societies Act, 1970. By the order complained of, the learned Assistant District Judge, Second Court, Hoogly, struck off the written statement filed by the petitioner-bank in Title Suit No. 17 of 1984, on the ground that any objection preferred by the bank under sections 30 and 33 of .the Arbitration Act, 1940, would now be barred by limitation. The learned Assistant District Judge by the same order had fixed a date for passing an ex parte decree in the suit in terms of Section 17 of the Arbitration Act, 1940.2. Opposite party No. 1, who is the husband of opposite party No. 2, was a member of the Konnagar Samabaya Co-operative Bank Ltd. They had a joint savings account with the said bank. A dispute has arisen between the petitioner bank and...
Sankar Prasad Chattakhandi and ors. Vs. State Bank of India and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-01-1986
Reported in: (1988)ILLJ510Cal
Samir Kumar Mukherjee, J.1. These three writ rules arise out of substantially similar facts and raise common questions of law.2. The petitioners were officers in the Central Accounts Office of the State Bank of India. As they were on the verge of superannuation (58 years of age), their cases for extension upto 60 years of age came up for consideration before the bank authorities and the refusal to grant such extension had led to the institution of the present writ proceedings.3. During the pendency of the writ proceedings before this Court the petitioners retired.4. The propriety and correctness of the refusal of extension constitutes the Us, involved in the present proceedings. The entire Us, as I shall presently indicate, hinges on the interpretation of Para. 19 of the State Bank of India Officers (Determination of Terms and Conditions of Service) Order, 1979. The apparent simplicity of the said Para. 19 had been overwhelmingly given a pompous burial by the complications, introduced ...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›