Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Reported in : (1987)20ITD470(Kol.)
1. These appeals by the department raising common contentions are disposed of by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience.2. The point for consideration which is common for all the years under appeal, is whether in computing the capital employed in the assessee's newly established undertakings, the amount due to the head office as reflected in the balance sheets of the undertakings as on the first day of the computation periods, representing the borrowed monies and debts owed by the head office to third parties, is to be deducted from the aggregate amounts representing the values of the assets of the respective undertakings for the purpose of determining the qualifying amount deductible under Section 80J (1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act').3. In the assessment year 1978-79 the assessee set up an industrial explosive plant at Korba (Korba Unit No. 1) which went into commercial production on 1-3-1978. The balance sheet was drawn up in respect of the said undertaking (...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : [1988]63CompCas627(Cal),(1987)64CTR(Cal)136,[1988]170ITR388(Cal),[1987]34TAXMAN68(Cal)
Dipak Kumar Sen J. 1. The Shahdara (Delhi) Saharanpur Light Railway Company Ltd. went into voluntary liquidation on December 10, 1970, as a solvent company. The liquidation progressed to a considerable extent. Most of the assets of the company have been realised by the liquidators except a few claims remaining outstanding to which we shall advert later. The creditors whose claims were due as on the date of the liquidation which were admitted by the liquidator have all been paid in full. 40% of the capital has been returned to the contributories. Two claims of the company against the State Railways aggregating to Rs. 1,14,614 and a claim for damages against the Union of India for Rs. 35 lakhs for which a suit has been filed in this court have remained pending.2. According to the liquidators, the claims pending against the company which are admitted aggregate to Rs. 1,48,179 and claims which are disputed aggregate to Rs. 2,61,762. The admitted claims of the State Railways for Rs. 1,44,90...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1988Cal133,(1987)1CompLJ97(Cal),91CWN591
A.M. Bhattacharjee, J. 1. The suit-tenancy, created in 1962 by a registered Deed of Lease for a period of more than 20 years, was admittedly not governed by the provisions of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1956 in view of Section 3 thereof and was governed by the provisions of Chap. V, T. P. Act. Under Section 111(g) T. P. Act, a lease of immoveable property stands determined by forfeiture for non-payment of rent if the lease provides for re-entry on the part of the lessor for such non-payment and the lessor gives notice in writing to the lessee of his intention to determine the lease. But Section 114 T. P. Act, however, provides that notwithstanding such forfeiture and resultant determination of lease, if the lessee, on being sued for ejectment, 'pays or tenders to the lessor' 'at the hearing of the suit, 'the rent in arrear, together with interest thereon and his full costs of the suit.....the Court may, in lieu of making a decree for ejectment, pass an order relieving the les...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1988Cal331
ORDERAjit Kumar Sengupta, J.1. In this application the grievance of the petitioners is that a Flat situate at 128 A, Dharamtalla Street, Calcutta was requisitioned on 6th May, 1957. Since then the requisition has been continuing. The petitioners have also contended that requisition cannot continue for ever and it was not made for any public purpose. An affidavit-in-opposition has been filed on behalf of the respondents. In para 6 of the said affidavit it has been stated as follows : --'Save what are matters of record and savewhat would appear therefrom, each and everyallegation made in paras 3 to 15 of the saidpetition are denied. I state that the premisesNo. 128A Dharamtala Street, Calcutta (theflat on the Western portion of Ground floor)was reqd. underRequisitionOrderNo. 45/57-- Reqn. dt 6-7-57 issued in exercise of powerconferred by Sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the WestBengal Premises Requisition & Control(Temporary Provisions) Act, 1947 (WestBengal Act, V of 1947) for public pur...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : 1987(28)ELT210(Cal)
Bhagabati Prasad Banerjee, J.1. This appeal arises from the judgment and order dated 10th August, 1978 passed by the learned Trial Judge by which the learned Judge made the Rule absolute and quashed the order dated 17th February, 1977 which was annexure 'C' to the main writ application and restrained the respondents from assessing the goods imported by the Petitioner which were the subject matter of the application under Tariff Item No 85.18/27(4) of the Indian Customs Tariff Act, 1975.2. The petitioner was engaged in manufacture of electric lamps of different size, shape and specification. In course of business, the petitioner had to import 'Tungsten Filaments' (hereinafter referred to as the imported goods) from abroad and that it was alleged that the Customs Authorities all along were imposing duty treating the same to be belonged to the group of Items mentioned in Chapter 21 and Heading No. 81.01.01/ 04(1) of the Indian Customs Tariff Act, 1975. Thereafter, the respondents all of a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : (1987)60CTR(Cal)105,[1987]168ITR846(Cal)
Dipak Kumar Sen, J.1. Bhagwan Ltd., the assessee, was assessedto income-tax for the assessment years 1959-60 and 1961-62, the relevant accounting years being the calendar years 1958 and 1960. The original assessments were completed on February 23, 1962, and January 31, 1963. The said assessments were subsequently modified on appeal before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner.2. Subsequently, the Income-tax Officer initiated proceedings under Section 147(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (' the Act'), on the ground that the assessee's income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment. In compliance with the notices issued under Section 148 of the Act, the assessee filed fresh returns of income. The Income-tax Officer held that a number of short-term loans and advances recorded in the accounts of the assessee were not genuine and the said amounts represented the assessee's concealed income. It was found that the alleged creditors had been carrying on the business of issuing spurious hundis. A...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1987Cal322
ORDERSankar Bhattacharyya, J.1. This Revisional application is directed against the findings of the learned Munsif, 1st Court, Asansol, on issues Nos. 1, 3 and 4 in Title Suit No. 287 of 1978 of this Court. It arises thus :2. The Opposite Party was a tenant in respect of the suit premises under the petitioners at a monthly rental of Rs, 75/-. Alleging illegal dispossession from the premises by the petitioners sometime in January, 1975, the Opposite Party brought the suit for recovery of possession.3. The defence, inter alia, was that the suit is not maintainable, that it is barred by limitation and that the court-fees paid are insufficient.4. The learned Munsif framed issues Nos. 1, 3 and 4 regarding maintainability, limitation and court-fees respectively. The issues were heard preliminarily and by Order No. 72 dated June 27, 1983 all of them were answered in favour of the Opposite Party. This order of the learned Munsif is under challenge in this Revisional application.5. On the point...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : 1987(31)ELT643(Cal)
Bimal Chandra Basak, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge on the 22nd December, 1976 whereby the learned Judge held that the notice issued in the instant case by the Respondents to the petitioners in the main writ-petition under Rule 10 of the Central Excise Rules 1944 (hereinafter referred to as the said Rules) is without jurisdiction inasmuch as the condition precedent to the issue of such a notice do not and have not been shown to exist and consequently the order of the Revisional Authority which purports to confirm the aforesaid notice is ex-facie erroneous. Accordingly, the learned Judge set aside the order of the Revisional Authority dated the 12th January, 1976 and to that extent, the Rule was made absolute.2. The facts of this case are as follows :-The writ-petitioner carries on business of manufacture of electrical insulators. One of the materials used in such manufacture is porcelain. As correctly set out by the learne...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1987Cal201,1988(15)ECC207
Sankari Prasad Das Ghosh, J.1. The extent of duty of an agent for a consignor in the matter of preparation of air consignment note or air way-bill under the Carriage by Air Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), is the main point for determination in this appeal arising from a judgment and decree passed by the learned Judge, Eleventh Bench, City Civil Court, Calcutta, in Money Suit No. 772 of 1975. The money suit was dismissed on contest by the learned Judge.2. The plaintiff-appellant is an authorised air cargo agent of the International Air Transport Authority (I.A.T.A.) representing all I.A.T. A. Air Lines and is also an authorised Customs House Agents. On the basis of an instruction from the defendant-respondent for collection, receipt and despatch of a consignment of 20 packages of finished leather (Industrial Globe Leather) in gunny to the consignee, M/s. Gutenstein and Company Inc. at 440, Frelinghuysen Avenue, New York (U.S.A.), the plaintiff prepared a shipping bill fo...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : [1987]166ITR439(Cal)
Dipak Kumar Sen, J.1. Messrs Rameshwarlal Sewdatrai, the assessee, is a partnership firm. It carries on business in grocery at Kalna in the Burdwan District of West Bengal. The assessee was assessed to income-tax in the assessment year 1970-71, the accounting year ending on April 14, 1970. In the proceedings for the assessment, the Income-tax Officer detected certain defects and irregularities in the accounts in respect of transactions of the assessee relating to sugar. It was found that the assessee had disclosed purchases of sugar one day before the closing of the accounting period and also that the assesse had not shown any closing stock at the end of the accounting year. It was also found that up to a certain point in the accounting year, the assessee had sold certain quantity of sugar in respect of which no purchases were disclosed nor was any opening stock shown. The Income-tax Officer came to the conclusion that the goods purchased had been suppressed and that the sources for th...
Tag this Judgment!