Kolkata Court November 1990 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.
Universal Cargo Carriers Inc. and anr. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-20-1990
Reported in: [1994]205ITR215(Cal)
Ajit K. Sengupta, J. 1. In this reference under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, at the instance of the assessee, the following question of law has been referred by the Tribunal for the opinion of this court for the assessment year 1978-79 : 'Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the assessee was entitled to deduction of 50% of the tax charged in India in respect of its shipping business as provided in article VI of the Agreement for Avoidance of Double Taxation between India and Greece ?' 2. The facts leading to this reference are stated hereafter. 3. The two assessee-companies are non-resident shipping companies incorporated in the Republic of Panama. The assessee-companies have no business apart from shipping business. 4. On May 31, 1976, they entered into a management agreement with a Greek company, namely, Messrs. Hellenic Lines Ltd. According to the agreement, the entire affairs of the assessee-companies were to be managed by the said Hellenic Lines Ltd....
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. S.P. Jaiswal Estates (P.) Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-20-1990
Reported in: [1993]203ITR493(Cal)
Ajit K. Sengupta, J.1. In this reference, the judgment was delivered on November 9, 1990, giving certain directions to the Tribunal to re-examine the case in the light of the facts and circumstances of the case as highlighted by learned counsel for the Revenue. It was found later that the submission made on the basis whereof the direction was given was not factually correct. Accordingly, the judgment dated November 9, 1990, is recalled. The matter is further heard.2. In this reference under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 1978-79, the following question of law has been referred to this court :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the additional corporation tax of Rs. 6,22,718 was allowable as deductions in this year ?'3. Shortly stated, the facts are that the assessee claimed a sum of Rs. 10,82,484 being expenditure relating to earlier years for which liability was stated to have arise...
Metal Distributors Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-20-1990
Reported in: [1993]199ITR694(Cal)
Ajit K. Sengupta, J. 1. In this reference under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, at the instance of the assessee, the following questions of law relevant for the assessment year 1968-69 have been referred to this court :' (a) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the conclusion of the Tribunal that the resolution dated June 10, 1967, passed by the board of directors of the assessee-company and the entries in its books of account transferring shares in six companies from the investment to the share trading account on the basis of their market value as on that date was merely a collusive device, was justified in law and/or in any event unreasonable or perverse ? (b) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the assessee commencedits business of dealing in shares on November 12, 1966, and not on June 10, 1967? (c) Whether the finding of the Tribunal that the assessee commenced its share de...
Ma Santoshi International Ltd. Vs. Kanoria Jute and Industries Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-20-1990
Reported in: (1991)1CALLT339(HC)
S.K. Mookherjee, J.1. This Revisionall application is directed against order dated 10th of November, 1990 passed by the learned Judge, 3rd Bench, Small Causes Court, Calcutta, in Distress No. 50 of 1990. By the said order the learned Judge vacated the Distress issued against the present opposite party on 21.8.1990. The reason for such vacation appears to be the provision of Section 22 of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act).2. Upon a consideration of the different provisions of the said Act, in the context of the submissions made by Mr. Kapoor in support of the Revisional application and Mr. Anindya Mitra on behalf of the contesting opposite party, it appears that Sections 15, 16, 17 and 20 of the said Act purport to lay down a procedure for enquiring into the sickness of an Industrial Undertaking and also for taking of consequential steps. The Board constituted under the Act is empowered to entertain a reference under S...
Universal Cargo Carriers Inc. and Another Vs. Commissioner of Income-t ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-20-1990
Reported in: (1993)124CTR(Cal)363,[1993]205ITR215(Cal),[1993]70TAXMAN515(Cal)
AJIT K. SENGUPTA J. - In this reference under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, at the instance of the assessee, the following question of law has been referred by the Tribunal for the opinion of this court for the assessment year 1978-79 :'Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the assessee was entitled to deduction of 50% of the tax charged in India in respect of its shipping business as provided in article VI of the Agreement for Avoidance of Double Taxation between India and Greece ?'The facts leading to this reference are stated hereafter.The two assessee-companies are non-resident shipping companies incorporated in the Republic of Panama. The assessee-companies have no business apart from shipping business.On May 31, 1976, they entered into a management agreement with a Greek company, namely, Messrs. Hellenic Lines Ltd. According to the agreement, the entire affairs of the assessee-companies were to be managed by the said Hellenic Lines Ltd., as their gene...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Shaw Wallace and Co. Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-19-1990
Reported in: (1991)100CTR(Cal)188,[1993]201ITR17(Cal)
Ajit K. Sengupta, J.1. In this reference under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 1979-80, the following question of law has been referred to this court :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the business carried on by the assessee in its computer division with the aid of computer system is an industrial undertaking which satisfies the conditions contained in Section 32A(2)(b)(iii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961?'2. Shortly staled, the facts are that the assessee-company claimed investment allowance on new plant and machinery installed in the computer division of the assessee-company. A sum of Rs. 99,006 consisting of Rs. 89,762 being the investment allowance was claimed in respect of Madras Computer Centre and Rs. 9,244 relating to the machinery installed in the Calcutta Computer Division. The Income-tax Officer, following the assessment order for the assessment year 1975-76, held that the ...
Statesman Ltd. Vs. Second Industrial Tribunal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-19-1990
Reported in: [1991(63)FLR816],(1993)IIILLJ192Cal
Kalyanmoy Ganguli, J. 1. The petitioner, in the instant application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, pray for a writ, inter alia, in the nature of certiorari requiring respondent 1 'to transmit and certify to this Hon'ble Court the record of the proceedings it had before it under Reference No. 2391 - I.R. I R/131-17/86, dated 29 October 1986, and its order made thereon being Order No. 10, dated 13 November 1987, to be in this Court dealt with in order that your petitioner may have the more sure and speedy justice and that the same may be set aside or quashed' and for a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents and each of them to forbear from enforcing or taking any step to enforce or giving any effect to the said pretended order. 2. Although the petitioners have prayed for quashing not only the Order No. 10, dated 13 November 1987, but also the order of reference, dated 29 October 1986, yet no argument was advanced on the question of the order of referen...
Ram Shah Vs. Competent Authority, CalcuttA.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-16-1990
Reported in: [1991]188ITR118(Cal)
ORDERRam Shah, the appellant, was detained by the Government of Bihar, by its order dated October 4, 1980, under the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974. His detention was neither revoked nor set aside by any Competent Authority. The Competent Authority under the Smugglers and Foreign Exchange Manipulators (Forfeiture of Property) Act, 1976 (hereafter the 'Act), issued a notice dated February 5, 1990, under section 6(1) of the Act, with respect to the following items of properties :Immovable properties :Landed property at village : Rajwahl District-Gopalganj, BiharKhata BighaKhasra KathaNo. DahurAreaEstimated value Rs. 10,0001272020214885 0371142 0216788 005 Total 0942 1/2 Rs.(ii) Land purchased in the name of his wife, Smt. Tetari Devi, as per deed No.15002 dated September 11, 1978.10,000(iii) House property constructed on the land in the name of wife, Smt. Tetari Devi60,000Movable propertie : (i) Cow 2,000(ii) Retail kirana shop at Sariya...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Union Carbide India Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-15-1990
Reported in: (1990)84CTR(Cal)184,[1993]203ITR301(Cal)
Ajit K. Sengupta, J. 1. In this reference under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 1980-81, the following questions of law have been referred to this court : '1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in law in holding that the assessee was entitled to investment allowance in respect of its 'Deep Sea Fishing Division II Unit' 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in law in allowing the assessee's claim under Section 35B of the Income-tax Act, 1961, in respect of Export Inspection Agency Fees 3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in law in holding that the assessee was entitled to relief under Section 80J of the Income-tax Act, 1961, in respect of 'Deep Sea Fishing Division II Unit' 4. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in law in holding that 'Capital work-in...
Smt. Elokeshi Chakraborty Vs. Sri Sunil Kumar Chakraborty
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-14-1990
Reported in: AIR1991Cal176
ORDERS.S. Ganguly, J.1. This first appeal has been preferred by the wife-opposite party from the judgment and decree passed by the learned Additional District Judge, 3rd Court, Midnapore in Matrimonial Suit No. 9 of 1986 awarding thereby a decree of judicial separation in favour of the husband-petitioner.2. The petitioner the respondent henceforward was a primary school teacher at Midnapore town with his ancestral home at Panchkhuri under Midnapore P.S. and very near Midnapore town and the opposite party/ wife the appellant henceforward was anurse posted at the primary health centre at Sabang within the district of Midnapore, when they were married on 22-5-83 according to Hindu Rites.3. The respondent's case as per his petition u/ S. 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act is that after the marriage he brought the appellant to his ancestral home at Panchkhuri. She stayed with the respondent there till the date of Astamangla and thereafter she went away to her quarters attached to the primary heal...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »