Kolkata Court June 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.
Sushil Kumar Dey and ors. Vs. State of West Bengal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-27-1986
Reported in: 1987CriLJ1571
A. K. Chatterjee, J.1. The short and the main point raised in this revisional application is whether Section 167(5) of the Code of Criminal Procedure which compels a Magistrate to make an order stopping further investigation into an offence in any case triable as a summons case, if the investigation is not concluded within a period of six months from the date of arrest of the accused unless the Magistrate is satisfied by the Investigating agency that for special reasons and in the interest of justice, the investigation should continue beyond the said period is attracted if an accused is not arrested but voluntarily surrenders before the Magistrate. The learned advocate for the petitioners has contended that although Section 167(5) of the Criminal Procedure Code speaks of counting the period of six months from the date of arrest of the accused, still it should apply equally if an accused surrenders before the Magistrate and in such a case, the period of six months should be computed fro...
Union of India (Uoi) Vs. Bilash Singh and Co.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-26-1986
Reported in: AIR1988Cal76
ORDERPratibha Bonnerjea, J.1. This is an application for setting aside the award dated 12-9-84 made in Sp, Suit No. 41 of 1975 under Ss. 30. 33 and 16 of the Indian Arbitration Act, on the grounds, inter alia, that the disputes raised in Special Suit No. 41 of 1975 had already been raised and decided in the earlier reference ordered in Sp. Suit No. 6A of 1970. What Bilas Singh and Co. had done in Sp. Suit No. 41 of 1975 was to inflate the claims in respect of the same old disputes which were agitated and decided by the Joint Arbitrators in Sp. Suit No. 6A of 1970. In Sp. Suit No. 41 of 1975, Bilas Singh & Co. also claimed interest on the sum awarded in Sp. Suit No. 6A of 1970, which had been duly paid by the petitioner. By entertaining these claims the Arbitrator legally misconducted himself and the proceeding. Bilas Singh & Co. ought to have claimed that interest in the earlier proceeding in Sp. Suit No. 6A of 1970. These grounds are set out in paragraphs 26. 27. 28, 29 and 30 of the ...
Sankar Mukherjee Vs. Atulananda Kundu and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-26-1986
Reported in: AIR1987Cal115
A.C. Sengupta, J.1. The present appellant filed the Title Suit No. 231 of. 1978 in the Court of Munsif, Second Additional Court, Alipore. It is a suit for ejectment of a premises tenant. A decree for ejectment was sought for on the ground that the defendant No. 1 sublet the premises in question to the defendant No. 2. The learned Munsif dismissed the suit on the finding that the plaintiff failed to prove that the defendant No. 2 was a sub-tenant in the premises under the defendant No. 1. The learned First Appellate Court affirmed that finding and dismissed that appeal. Hence the second appeal by the plaintiff. The question of subtenancy was the only point that was canvassed in this appeal.2. The plaintiffs case is mainly this. The defendant No. 1 was a monthly tenant under the plaintiff in respect of the premises No. 5/1H, Keyatala Road described in the schedule to the plaint at a rent of Rs. 550/-per month payable according to English calendar month. Defendant No. 1 is in police servi...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Ram Gopal Thirani and Sons
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-25-1986
Reported in: [1988]171ITR314(Cal)
Dipak Kumar Sen, J. 1. In this application under Section 261 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the Commissioner of Income-tax, West Bengal-XIII, seeks a certificate from us that Income-tax Reference No. 173 of 1978 (intituted Ram Gopal Thirani and Sons, Darjeeling v. Commissioner of Income-tax, West Bengal-I), where a judgment was delivered by this court on November 7, 1984, is a case fit for appeal to the Supreme Court.2. The substantial question which, it is contended, arises in this case is whether, having regard to the provisions of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, and the fact that the assessee being governed by the Mitakshara School of Hindu Law, his status would be that of an individual and not that of a Hindu undivided family relating to the properties and business inherited by him.3. The relevant facts may be shortly noted. In the assessment years 1969-70 and 1971-72, Ram Gopal Thirani, the assessee, claimed that the properties which he had inherited from his father, Iswardas Thiran...
Dilip Kumar Biswas Vs. Kamalendu Chanda
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-24-1986
Reported in: AIR1987Cal172
ORDERSankar Bhattacharyya, J. 1. This revisional application seeks to challenge the order of the learned Additional District Judge, 5th Court, Alipore. passed in Misc. Appeal No. 450 of 1981, whereby the order of ad interim injunction passed by the learned Munsif, 2nd Court, Alipore, against the opposite party was set aside. The facts leading on to the application are as under. 2. In a suit for eviction of the petitioner by the opposite party, the petitioner moved an application for temporary injunction restraining the opposite party, his men and agents from interfering with the supply of electricity to the suit premises or preventing the petitioner's access to the electric meter box and the main switch for effecting repair and/or restoring electricity, by erecting a partition wall. 3. The learned Munsif, on the same day, passed an ex parte order directing the opposite party to maintain status quo with respect to the electric meter and the main switch of the suit premises till the disp...
State of West Bengal Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-24-1986
Reported in: AIR1987Cal226
A.M. Bhattacharjee, J.1. This appeal arising out of a simple suit against the Railways for compensation for non-delivery of the goods consigned has involved several questions of law. The suit was filed on 27-2-1962 in the Court of the Subordinate Judge, 24-Parganas, on the allegation that a consignment of several drums of Caustic Soda, booked on 18-9-1948 for and on behalf of the then Province of West Bengal at Kantapukur Railway Station for carriage to Riyang Railway Station to be delivered to the Quinologist of the Government of West Bengal in Mungpoo, District Darjeeling, was never delivered.2. The learned Subordinate Judge, who tried the suit, dismissed the suit on three grounds. The first ground was that the suit having been filed by the State of West Bengal against the Union of India could be taken cognisance of only by the Supreme Court in its original jurisdiction under Article 131 of the Constitution. The second gfound was that out of the four Railways sued in this case, no no...
Union Carbide India Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-24-1986
Reported in: (1986)56CTR(Cal)146,[1987]165ITR678(Cal)
Dipak Kumar Sen, J.1. In this reference under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the following questions have been referred as questions of law arising out of the order of the Tribunal for the opinion of this court:' (1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the sum of Rs. 5,57,251 was allowable as a revenue loss having regard to the provisions of Section 43A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ? (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the capital employed should mean the cost of acquisition (not written down value) of the assets and also the liabilities and the borrowed moneys for the purpose of relief under Section 80J in respect of the assessee's Deep Sea Fishing Division ? (3) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, depreciation should be allowed in respect of assets used by the assessee for scientific research ? (4) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, fees of Rs. 2,25,000 paid to the Registr...
Hanuman Estates Ltd. Vs. Income-tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-23-1986
Reported in: (1986)18ITD527(Kol.)
1. These two appeals are taken together and disposed of by a common order.2. The assessee is a private limited company. The first common objection of the assessee is that the assessee should be allowed depreciation on energized tubewell. The assessee derives income from property, service charges and other sources. The income from service charges had not been computed separately but it appears from the computation that the income from the said source had been subjected to tax. The assessee in its building had sunk a tubewell to meet with the demand of the tenants for water. The assessee claimed depreciation on the tubewell and the same has been denied by the ITO as well as by the Commissioner (Appeals).3. Shri Chopra, the assessee's counsel, urged that the assessee was realizing from the tenants rent as well as service charges. The tubewell was for the facility of the tenants and, therefore, the assessee should be allowed depreciation. Shri Kundu, the departmental representative, on th...
Bishnu Krishna Shrestha Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-23-1986
Reported in: 1987(11)ECC385,1987(27)ELT369(Cal),[1987]168ITR815(Cal),[1987]67STC209(Cal)
Suhas Chandra Sen, J.1. On April 10, 1986, this writ petition was moved praying for, inter alia, quashing of a search warrant No. C-20/89 of 1986, dated March 11, 1986, issued under Section 37 of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973, in respect of premises No. 3, National Tower, 13, Louden Street, Calcutta-700 017. The allegation in the writ petition was that the search warrant was used for the purpose of making a roving enquiry and not for the purpose of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act. It was alleged that there was no ground for issuing the search warrant.2. This writ petition was moved upon notice and Sri S.K. Kundu appeared for the petitioner. An order of status quo was passed. The flat in question was directed to be kept under seal. Directions were given for filing of the affidavits.3. A point was taken on behalf of the respondent that the writ petition was unauthorised. The writ petitioner, Bishnu Krishna Shrestha, was not available in Calcutta and had not signed the pet...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Shell Petroleum Co. Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-23-1986
Reported in: (1986)56CTR(Cal)134,[1987]164ITR357(Cal)
Dipak Kumar Sen, J.1. The Shell Petroleum Co. Ltd., the assessee, a non-resident company, was assessed to income-tax in the assessment year 1957-58, the relevant accounting year ending on December 31, 1956. During the relevant accounting year, the assessee held 50% of the total share capital of Burmah-Shell Refineries Ltd., an existing company within the meaning of the Companies Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Indian company').2. In the income-tax assessment for the said assessment year, the Income-tax Officer included in the total income of the assessee the dividend received from the Indian company. The Indian company issued a certificate under Section 20 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, recording that 22.01% of the dividend came out of the profits of the Indian company exempt under Section 15C of the Act of 1922. The Income-tax Officer accepted the percentage provisionally pending final assessment of the Indian company. The dividend received from the Indian company was ...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »