Kolkata Court August 1988 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.
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Hindusthan Aluminium Corporation Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-09-1988
Reported in: [1990]184ITR140(Cal)
AJIT K. SENGUPTA J. - This application has been made by the Commissioner of Income-tax for leave to appeal before the Supreme Court under section 261 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The facts are that the assessee is a c ompany engaged in aluminium industry. During the accounting years relevant to the assessment years 1965-66 to 1969-70, the assessee incurred expenditure of Rs. 3,07,865, Rs. 3,26,067, Rs. 5,53,765, Rs. 2,47,665 and Rs. 6,922, respectively, under the head 'Prospecting and investigation expenses' and claimed the same as revenue expenditure. The Income-tax Officer, however, disallowed the assessees claim.Being aggrieved by the said order of the Revenue, the assessee filed an application under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Upon the said application, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Calcutta, by its order dated March 23, 1977, referred the following question to the High Court at Calcutta :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstance of the case, the Tribunal ...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Sree Ram Santosh Kumar
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-08-1988
Reported in: [1989]179ITR478(Cal)
Ajit K. Sengupta, J.1. At the instance of the Commissioner of Income-tax, West Bengal, Calcutta, the following question of law has been referred to this court under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 1963-64 :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the imposition of penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, on the assessee-firm was not justified ?'2. Shortly stated, the facts are that the assessee is a partnership firm. For the year under reference, initially it returned an income of Rs. 29,901. Later on, in the revised return, the income disclosed was Rs. 32,608. The Income-tax Officer completed the assessment of the assessee on a total income of Rs. 1,13,339. The difference was mainly due to the addition of bogus loans of Rs. 58,000 as 'income from undisclosed sources' and disallowance of interest thereon of Rs. 13,850. Those loans stood in the books of the assessee in ...
Commissioner of Wealth-tax Vs. Bhagwan Prosad Kanoi.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-08-1988
Reported in: [1990]184ITR95(Cal)
AJIT K. SENGUPTA J. - In this application under section 27(1) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, the following question of law has been referred to this court for the assessment years 1964-65 to 1968-69 :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstance of the case, the provision of section 18(1)(a) of the Wealth-tax Act. 1957, as they stood prior to the amendment with effect from April 1, 1969, will apply in the matter of the quantum of penalty livable against the assessee for each of the assessment year under consideration ?'The facts as briefly stated are that the wealth-tax returns were due from the assessee on or before June 30, 1964, June 30, 1965, June 30, 1966, June 30, 1967 and June 30, 1968, respectively. The assessee, however, voluntarily filed the returns for the years under consideration on February 9, 1972. As the wealth-tax returns were filed late, the Wealth-tax officer issued show-cause notice to the assessee as to why penalty under section 18(1)(a) of the Act be not levied aga...
Kalyan Kumar Basak Vs. Salil Kumar Basak and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-05-1988
Reported in: AIR1989Cal159,93CWN396
G.N. Ray, J.1. This appeal is directed against order dt. 3rd Feb. 1983 passed by the learned trial Judge in Suit No. 1892 of 1947.2. Sm. Jharna Bose on the strength of her purchase of the undivided 1/7th share in the disputed properties from Madan Mohan Basak, one of the sons of Nandalal Basak, brought a partition suit being Suit No. 1892 of 1947 in the Ordinary Original Jurisdiction of this Court. In 1964, a preliminary decree was passed declaring the shares of the parties and a learned Advocate was appointed as Commissioner of Partition for dividing the disputed properties by metes and bounds in seven equal parts and to allot 1/7th share to each group of parties, alternatively to sell the properties by public auction if it was found that the disputed properties were incapable of partition. The learned trial Judge, however, gave liberty to the parties to bid at such auction and liberty was also given to the parties to purchase the share of Sm. Jharna Bose being a stranger purchaser. T...
Ramnugger Cane and Sugar Co. Ltd. Vs. Superintendent of C. Ex.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-05-1988
Reported in: 1989(41)ELT387(Cal)
Baboo Lal Jain, J.1. The petitioner No. 1 which is a sugar factory made certain incentive rebate claims under Central Excise Notification No. 146/74-CE/F.No. 14/22/74-CX. I, dated 29-10-1974, by its letter dated 5th Februry, 1975. The said claims of the petitioner were rejected by letter dated 17th March, 1975 and also by further letter dated 1st May, 1975.2. On the petitioner further pursuing the matter, the Under Secretary to the Government of India, Ministry of Finance (Central Board of Excise & Customs) by its letter dated 30th May, 1975 informed the petitioner that if the petitioner felt aggrieved by the order of the Chief Accounts Officer, he may follow the procedure of appeal/revision as provided under the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944.3. It appears that the petitioner wrote several letters to the Assistant Collector, Central Excise, praying that the order should be granted by the Assistant Collector, Central Excise. It also appears that by letter dated 26th September, 1977...
B.C. Basak Vs. Industrial Development Bank of India and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-04-1988
Reported in: (1989)ILLJ122Cal
Manoj Kumar Mukherjee, J.1. This appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent is directed against the judgment and order dated May 2, 1983 passed by a learned Judge of this Court rejecting the petition filed by the appellant under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Facts leading to the filing of the writ petition are as under.2. At all material times the appellant was the Deputy Manager (Technical) of the Industrial Development Bank of India, Calcutta, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Bank'), the respondent no I herein. By a letter dated February 14, 1976 the General Manager of the Bank called upon the appellant to show cause why disciplinary proceeding should not be instituted against him for having availed of pecuniary advantage to the tune of Rs. 1,375/- in April, 1974 from M/s. Traco Carbide Limited, Calcutta ('the Company' for short) with whom the appellant was having official dealings in connection with processing of their application for financial assistance. As the cause...
Bansal Industrial Gases (Bihar) Ltd. Vs. Collector of C. Ex.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-02-1988
Reported in: 1989(22)ECC47,1991LC277(Calcutta),1988(37)ELT347(Cal)
Bhagabati Prasad Banerjee, J.1. This writ application is directed against an order dated 12th February, 1985 passed by the Collector (Appeals) wherein it was held that the Additional Collector of Central Excise who passed the original order requiring the petitioner company to pay Central Excise duty amounting to Rs. 62,874/- under the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 read with Rule 9(2) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 and the penalty of Rs. 5.000/- for contravention of the Central Excise Rules, is not an authority lower in rank to the Collector of Central Excise and as such it was held that the appeal should be decided by the Central Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal and that consequently, ft was held that the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Calcutta had no jurisdiction to entertain and/or dispose of the appeal under the law. The question of law that is involved In this case is whether the Additional Collector of Central Excise is an authority lower in rank to the...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Shree Bajrang Electric Steel Co. (P.) L ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-02-1988
Reported in: [1988]174ITR672(Cal)
AJIT K. SENGUPTA J. - At the instance of the Commissioner of Income-tax, West Bengal VI, the following question of law for the assessment year 1971-72 has been referred to this court under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and having regard to the fact that the original assessment was completed on March 22, 1974, the Tribunal was justified in law in directing the Income-tax Officer to allow deductions under sections 80-1 and 80J of the Income-tax Act on the basis of the assessees claim for such deductions made in itsletter dated February 8, 1979, in the course of the reassessment proceedings pending in terms of the Tribunals order in I.T.A. No. 2971/Cal/74-75, dated June 11, 1976 ?'In our vie, the question has to be reframed as follows :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and having regard to the fact that the Tribunal was justified in law in directing the Income-tax Officer to allow deduction...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Budge Budge Amalgamated Mills Ltd. (No. ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-01-1988
Reported in: [1989]175ITR378(Cal)
Sengupta, J.1. At the instance of the Commissioner, the following question of law has been referred to this court under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act'), for the assessment year 1961-62 :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal misdirected itself in law in holding that the mistake sought to be rectified under Section 154 of the income-tax Act, 1961, was not a mistake apparent from the record within the meaning of the said section ?'2. The facts shortly stated hereinafter are as follows :The assessee in its return of income had claimed development rebate of Rs. 4,55,623 even though it had created a reserve of Rs. 1,46,566 only. During the course of the assessment proceedings, the Income-tax Officer, by his letter dated January 17, 1964, directed the assessee to create the necessary reserve as could be seen from the following extracts from the said letter :'The Income-tax Act, 1961, contemplates that the assessee has the obligation o...
C.N. Dey Vs. the State
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-01-1988
Reported in: 1989CriLJ467
A.C. Sen Gupta, J.1. This revisional application is directed against the order dated 11-11-82 passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 15th Court, Calcutta acquitting the accused persons of the charges framed against them.2. The present petitioner who is the de facto complainant in respect of the case being aggrieved by the said order has preferred this revisional application.3. The learned Magistrate on the basis of the complaint framed charges against the accused persons under Sections 381/114/411 of the Indian Penal Code. Witnesses were producted before him and they were examined by the prosecution On the prayer of the accused opposite party the cross-examination of the witnesses were deferred On the subsequent dates, the witnesses did not appear and on that ground, the learned Magistrate by the impugned order acquitted the accused persons by treating the prosecution case as closed and by expunging the evidence of witnesses given in examination-in-chief. 4. From the order itse...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »