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.
Dooars Transport Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-13-1986
Reported in: (1986)56CTR(Cal)83,[1986]162ITR383(Cal)
Dipak Kumar Sen, J.1. This reference arises out of the assessment of M/s. Dooars Transport, the assessee, for the assessment years 1964-65, 1966-67, 1967-68, 1968-69 and 1969-70, the relevant accounting periods ending on 30th June of the calendar years 1963, 1965, 1966, 1967 and 1968. Under Section 139 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, as it stood at the relevant time, the assessee was required to file his returns for the said assessment years by 30th June of the calendar years 1964, 1966, 1967, 1968 and 1969. The assessee failed to do so. For the assessment year 1966-67, the assessee filed an application on September 30, 1966, praying for an extension of time by three months for submission of the returns, It is on record that no order was communicated to the assessee in respect of the said application. In respect of the assessment year 1968-69, time to file the return was extended till December 31, 1968, and for the assessment year 1969-70, such time was extended till June 30, 1970. The as...
income-tax Officer Vs. Apeejay (P.) Ltd.
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-12-1986
Reported in: (1986)19ITD1a(Kol.)
1. These two appeals, one by the department and the other by the assessee, are heard together and disposed of by this common order for the sake of convenience.2. We first take up the departmental appeal. The first ground in this appeal states that the Commissioner (Appeals) did not give an opportunity of being heard to the ITO and so the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) was bad, illegal and void. Shri S.K. Lahiri, the learned representative for the department, explained before us that the ground means that the ITO was not given an opportunity of being heard by the Commissioner (Appeals) before he finalised the appeal. However, he was not able to establish before us that the ITO was not indeed informed about the hearing of the appeal by the Commissioner (Appeals) in spite of the normal practice of the department to call for the records of the ITO and let him know the date of hearing of the appeal so that the ITO could be present at the time of hearing if he so chose.Under the circum...
Indian Oxygen Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-12-1986
Reported in: (1986)56CTR(Cal)185,[1987]164ITR466(Cal)
Dipak Kumar Sen, J.1. This reference arises out of the income-tax assessment of Indian Oxygen Ltd., the assessee, in the assessment year 1976-77 the relevant accounting year ending on September 30, 1975. The Income-tax Officer while making the assessment disallowed deduction claimed under Section 80J in respect of a high purity gas manufacturing unit on the ground that the said unit commenced commercial production with effect from April 1, 1975. The Income-tax Officer allowed deduction only for six months in respect of the capital employed in respect of the said plant at the rate of 6%.2. In respect of other capital, the assessee included in the computation the value of the assets and liabilities at the beginning of the computation period and also the proportionate average of the increase or decrease of assets and liabilities during the year without considering the bank overdraft allocable to the said unit. The Income-tax Officer proceeded on the basis of the assets and liabilities as ...
income-tax Officer Vs. Smt. Devmani AthA.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-11-1986
Reported in: [1987]20ITD36(Cal)
ORDERPer Shri A. K. Das, Judicial Member - IT Appeal Nos. 74 to 76 (Ctk.) of 1984 have been filed by the department and relate to the assessment years 1974-75 to 1976-77. IT Appeal Nos. 102 to 105 (Ctk.) of 1984 are by the assessee and relate to the assessment years 1977-78 to 1980-81.2. the house property to which the dispute relates originally belonged to the assessees father-in-law Shivaji Nathubhai and devolved on the assessee under a will. Shivaji Nathubhai carried on business in tendu leaves. For the purpose of carrying on this business he created an equitable mortgage in respect of the house property in favour of the United Commercial Bank, Sambalpur on 4-8-1955 for taking a loan of Rs. 2,82,500 for payment of bills and hundis. Shivaji Nathubhai expired on 2-3-1964 and the will executed by him was duly probated. For the assessment years 1974-75 to 1976-77, the assessing ITO allowed deduction of the interest payable under this mortgage against the house rent receivable from the h...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Atlas Steel Co. Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-10-1986
Reported in: (1986)56CTR(Cal)73,[1987]164ITR401(Cal)
Dipak Kumar Sen, J.1. The facts found or admitted in the above reference and the proceedings leading up to the same are, inter alia, as follows:2. Atlas Steel Co. Ltd., the assessee, is a non-resident company incorporated under the laws of and located in, Canada.3. An agreement in writing dated September 12, 1961, was entered into by and between Hindusthan Steel Ltd., Ranchi, a Government of India undertaking and one Atlas Steel Company Limited, another non-resident company.4. By a subsequent agreement also in writing dated November 14, 1962, entered into amongst the said Atlas Steel Co. Ltd., the assessee, Hindusthan Steel Ltd. and one Rio Algon Lines Ltd., another nonresident company, the rights and liabilities of Atlas Steel Co. Ltd., under the earlier agreement dated September 12, 1961, were assigned to Atlas Steel Co. Ltd., the assessee.5. The said agreement dated September 12, 1961, was a technical collaboration agreement. Hindusthan Steel Ltd. intended to establish a plant in In...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Sohanlal Jajodia
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-10-1986
Reported in: [1987]164ITR626(Cal)
Dipak Kumar Sen, J. 1. The facts found or admitted and the proceedings leading up to these references are, inter alia, that Sohanlal Jajodia, the assessee, was assessed to income-tax for the assessment year 1955-56, the accounting year ending some time in April, 1955. The said assessment was reopened by a notice dated April 10, 1963, The assessee was a partner of Madanlal Sohanlal & Co., a registered firm. In 1946, the firm had purchased the entire shares of M/s. Hall & Anderson (P.) Ltd., a private limited company. Thereafter, a public limited company in the same name, namely, Hall & Anderson Ltd., was floated and the assets of the private limited company were sold to the public limited company for Rs. 80 lakhs. The said amount was received by the firm on behalf of the private limited company. In the balance-sheet of the private limited company as on March 31, 1947, the said amount of Rs. 80 lakhs was shown ' as an advance recoverable in cash from a director '. 2. In the assessment, t...
Biswanath Saha Vs. Sikha Saha
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-07-1986
Reported in: 1986CriLJ1199
Shamsuddin Ahmed, J.1. This Revisional Application is directed against order dated 5-10-85 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, 2nd Court at Barrackpore, 24 Parganas in Misc. Case No. 94 of 1982 Under Section 125 Cr. P.C. The petitioner's case is that he married the O.P. wife and lived together for some time. As she became pregnant she was sent to her father's place. During her stay at her father's place she used to misbehave with the petitioner and also used to treat him with cruelty and insulted. After the birth of a new baby when he went to see the baby she insulted him but the O.P. warned him and asked him not to go there. She also refused to return to the petitioner's house with the baby. After some reconciliation the petitioner took her back but only for some time. On 6th December 1978 she left with the child deserting the petitioner. He was compelled to file a suit for a decree of divorce. On 20-1-83 the suit was decreed ex parte Under Section 13(1)(ia), (ib) of the Hindu ...
Dossani Films Vs. Income-tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-03-1986
Reported in: (1987)21ITD159(Kol.)
1. These two appeals filed by the same assessee are heard together and disposed of by this common order for the sake of convenience.2. The assessee is a partnership firm deriving income from business as a distributor of cinematograph films. These two appeals relate to the assessment years 1972-73 and 1973-74. In the assessment years 1970-71 and 1971-72, the ITO had allowed only a portion of the cost of films released during those years and the balance was allowed in the subsequent two years. Thus, in respect of films released in the assessment years 1970-71 and 1971-72, the ITO had allowed as deduction the cost of films to the tune of Rs. 8,77,000 in the assessment year 1972-73. Similarly, in the assessment year 1973-74, the ITO had allowed a sum of Rs. 1,08,200 as deduction in respect of a film released in the assessment year 1971-72. This was the position in the original assessments made by the ITO for the assessment years 1972-73 and 1973-74. The assessee had gone on appeal in the ...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Union Carbide India Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-03-1986
Reported in: (1986)56CTR(Cal)277,[1987]165ITR546(Cal)
Dipak Kumar Sen, J.1. This consolidated reference arises out of the assessment of Union Carbide India Ltd., the assessee, to income-tax in the assessment years 1973-74 to 1975-76. On an application of the Revenue under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (' the Act'), the following question has been referred as a question of law arising out of the order of the Tribunal in the assessment year 1975-76 for the opinion of this court:' 1. Whether the Tribunal was justified in holding that capital work-in-progress in the industrial undertaking Electrolytic Manganese Company, should be included in the computation of 'capital employed' for the purpose of the relief under Section 80J of the Income-tax Act, 1961 '2. On an application of the assessee under Section 256(1), the following questions have been referred as questions of law arising out of the orders of the Tribunal for the opinion of this court:For the assessment year 1974-75 : '2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances o...
Birla Jute Manufacturing Co. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-03-1986
Reported in: (1986)56CTR(Cal)28,[1986]162ITR413(Cal)
Dipak Kumar Sen, J. 1. This reference arises out of the assessment of Birla Jute ., the assessee, to income-tax in the assessment years 1973-74, 1974-75 and 1976-77. On an application of the assessee 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. Question common to all the assessment years : ' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee is entitled to weighted deduction for export markets development allowance in respect of the various expenses which the Tribunal disallowed ' 2. Common question relating to the assessment years 1973-74 and 1974-75 : ' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, theassessee's claim for deduction in respect of liability for surtax is allowable while computing the total income ' 3. Question relating to the assessment year 1973-74 : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumst...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »