Kolkata Court August 1989 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 Copper Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-18-1989
Reported in: [1992]196ITR750(Cal)
Suhas Chandra Sen, J. 1. The Tribunal has referred the following question of law to this court under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act,1961 :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the claim of Rs. 6,99,539 for the assessment year 1972-73 and Rs. 4,42,073 for the assessment year 1973-74 paid as decretal amount was an allowable expenditure in computing the income from the Kayanite business of the assessee ?'2. The assessment years involved are 1972-73 and 1973-74 for which the years of account are the calendar years 1971 and 1972.3. It has been pointed out on behalf of the assessee that the Tribunal has followed its decision in the assessee's own case in the earlier assessment year against which no reference application has been made ; it has been pointed out that the explanation in respect of these claims have been allowed by the Department in the previous year without any question. The nature of the payments has been stated by the Tribunal in the following word...
Ajoy Kumar Sarkar Vs. State and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-18-1989
Reported in: (1990)1CALLT1(HC)
Samir Kumar Mookherjee, J.1. The present writ petition is directed against two proceedings and two orders passed by the Revenue Officer, respondent No. 2,-one, dated 3.12.87 in a proceeding (suo motu Case No. 124/87) under Section 44(2a) of the West Bengal Estates Acquisition Act (hereinafter referred to as the 'said Act') and the other in a Big Raiyat Case (No. 164), dated 4.12.87.2. The present writ petitioner and his wife, respondent No. 8, purchased the involved lands from one Bikash Chandra Dhara, respondent No. 7, by two registered sale deeds on 1st September, 1982. By a deed of gift executed on 2nd February, 1983 respondent No. 8 gifted her purchased property in favour of the writ petitioner. At the time of purchase, the lands stood recorded in the name of the vendor Bikash Chandra Dhara in the finally published records of rights, which were published on 19th July, 1957. Bikash claims to have acquired ownership of the said lands by purchase from one Jagadish Chandra Guria on 12t...
Shila Roy Vs. Authority U/S 8 of West Bengal Land Reforms Act
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-16-1989
Reported in: (1990)1CALLT65(HC),94CWN307
Monoj Kumar Mukherjee, J.1. The short question that seeks an answer in this writ petition is as to whether Section '21E of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955 ('Act' for short) which debar Advocates and legal practitioners from appearing, pleading or acting in any capacity on behalf of the party before any officer or authority deciding disputes under the provisions of Chapter III of the Act, is ultra vires the Constitution of India. The question arises in this way.2. The writ petitioners has filed a suit against the private respondents herein in the Second Court of the Munsif at Baruipur for a permanent injunction restraining them from interfering with her peaceful possession in respect of certain plots of land and for other consequential reliefs. In contesting the suit, the private respondents laid a claim as Bargadars in respect of the plots in question. In view of the claim so made, the learned Munsif referred the matter to the authority appointed under Section 18 of the Act as r...
Hindusthan Paper Corporation Limited Vs. Keneilhouse Angami
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-14-1989
Reported in: (1990)1CALLT200(HC),[1990]68CompCas361(Cal)
Bimal Chandra Basak, J.1. This appeal is directed against an order dated March 23, 1989, whereby the teamed trial judge allowed the applications made under Section 20 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 (hereinafter referred to as 'the said Act'), and gave necessary directions in connection with the arbitration proceedings. The facts of this case as alleged in the petition are as follows :2. There was an agreement in writing between the plaintiffs, who are the respondents herein, and the defendants, who are the appellants herein regarding construction of-some plants. Clause 23.1 of this agreement contained an arbitration clause which provides as follows ;'In the event of any question or disputes arising under or out of these conditions or in connection with this or relating to this contract except as to any matters the decision of which is specifically provided for in these conditions the matter in dispute shall be referred to two arbitrators, one to be nominated by the company and one to be ...
Ranjit Kumar Pal Vs. the State
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-14-1989
Reported in: 1990CriLJ643
Ajit Kumar Sengupta, J.1. This revisional application demonstrates the colossal wastage of money by Life Insurance Corporation, a public undertaking, the prosecution of a Criminal Case for 22 years for a paltry sum of Rs. 8,000/- under an Insurance Policy taken on 15th October, 1957 by one Hrishikesh Ghosh just two years before his death. This case has a chequered history.2. On October 15, 1957, a Life Insurance Policy was effected in favour of the said Hrishikesh Ghosh. On January 1, 1969, the said policy was assigned in favour of the petitioner and one Joydev Paul. On October 20, 1959, the said Hrishikesh Ghosh died. On March 1, 1960, claim for policy of Rs. 8000/-was lodged on behalf of the assignees.3. On 2nd September, 1960, Sri P. H. Gupta, Zonal Manager, Life Insurance Corporation of India lodged a complaint with the Officer-in-Charge, Bhadreshwar Police Station against the petitioner and six others, namely Dr. Panchanan Paul (since deceased), Sri Joydeb Paul, Sri Ramesh Chandra...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Hindusthan Sanitaryware and Industries ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-14-1989
Reported in: (1992)106CTR(Cal)268
BHAGABATI PRASAD BANERJEE, J. :The following two questions of law have been referred to this Court by the Tribunal under s. 256(1) of the IT Act, 1961 :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the replacement cost of the petrol engine by diesel engine of the jeep should be treated as revenue expenditure and not as capital expenditure 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that extra shift allowance on generator is allowable even though there is no specific provision in the IT Rules ?'2. The assessment year involved in this reference is the asst. yr. 1977-78, for which the relevant period of account is the ended on 31st March, 1977.3. So far as the second question is concerned, it is concluded by the decision of this Court in IT Ref. No. 171 of 1983 (Hindusthan Sanitaryware & Industries Ltd. vs. CIT) judgment in which delivered today. In view of the said decision, ...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Birla Cotton Spg. and Wvg. Mills Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-14-1989
Reported in: (1992)107CTR(Cal)188
BHAGABATI PRASAD BANERJEE, J. :The Tribunal has referred the following question of law under s. 256(1) of the IT Act, 1961 to this Court :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and on the correct interpretation of the Ordinance amending the Payment of Bonus Act, 1965 on 25th September, 1975 with retrospective effect, the assessee was entitled to the deduction of Rs. 12,59,034 in computing its total income for the accounting period relevant to the asst. yr. 1975-76 ?'2. In this case the assessment year involved is 1975-76 for which the corresponding year of accounting is the year ended on 31st March, 1975.3. The facts found by the Tribunal as contained in the statement of case are as under :Admittedly the assessee had for the year provided for bonus @ 8.33% in accordance with the provisions of the Payment of Bonus Act, 1965. After the accounts of the assessee for the year under consideration were closed on 31st March, 1975, the Government of India issued an Ordinanc...
Smt. Sova Rani Dutta Vs. Debabrata Dutta
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-10-1989
Reported in: AIR1991Cal186
1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 30-11-84 passed by Sri S. Seal, Additional District Judge, 1st Court, Hooghly in Money Appeal No. 10 of 1980 modifying the decree dated 16th September, 1980 passed by Sri B. N. Chandra, Subordinate Judge, 1st Court, Hooghly in Money Suit No. 8 of 1977.2. Plaintiff Debabrata Dutta, filed Money Suit No. 8 of 1977 against the defendant Smt. Sovarani Dutta claiming damages for malicious prosecution valued at Rs. 104/-His case is that on 23-10-76, at 18.10 hours the defendant lodged a First Information Report in the District of Hooghly on an wilful false charge of theft of ear-ring from the person of the defendant against the plaintiff and hersister Smt. Biva Bati Dutta. The defendant knew the statements made in her First Information Report to be completely false and she maliciously made those statements before the police to implicate the plaintiff and her sister in a false criminal case and to defame and injure the plaintiff ...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Pramia Engineering Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-10-1989
Reported in: [1993]202ITR298(Cal)
Suhas Chandba Sen, J. 1. The Tribunal has referred the following question of law under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, to this court ;' Whether the Tribunal is right, on the facts and the circumstances of the case, in interpreting that the composite and lump sum amount of Rs. 2,71,110 received by the lessee from the lessor is not liable to capital gains, though a part of this lump sum amount relates to consideration for premature surrender of the leasehold rights ?'2. In this case, the assessment year involved is 1975-76 for which the corresponding accounting period is the year ended on April 30, 1974.3. The facts stated by the Tribunal contained in the statement of case are as follows :The assessee, a resident company, took on lease several plots of land within the premises known as ' Tagore Villa ' at Nos. 1 and 1A, Kali Kishen Tagore Street, Calcutta, for periods varying between 30 and 50 years. The assessee agreed to develop the plots at its own cost to lay roads, drain...
Arbee Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-10-1989
Reported in: [1993]202ITR270(Cal)
Suhas Chandra Sen, J. 1. The following question of law has been referred to this court by the Tribunal under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, any larger dividend than that declared by the assessee-company could reasonably be distributed within the meaning of Section 104 of the Income-tax Act. 1961, and the application of Section 104 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, was in accordance with law ?' 2. The assessment year involved in this reference is the assessment year 1975-76 for which the relevant accounting period is the year ending on March 31, 1975.3. The assessee's case is that the Tribunal has failed to take into consideration the provisions of Section 205A of the Companies Act, 19.56, which imposes a duty upon companies to create a reserve and there is a penalty clause for any default. The assessee is right in its contention that the Tribunal could not reasonably expect the assessee-company to disregard the provis...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »