Kolkata Court February 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.
Maharani Rajlakshmi Kumari Devi Vs. Commissioner of Wealth-tax
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-23-1990
Reported in: [1990]184ITR53(Cal)
Susanta Chatterji, J.1. The present rule was issued on September 17, 1979, at the instance of the writ petitioner praying, inter alia, for a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to cancel and/or rescind the order dated May 7, 1979, passed under Section 25(1) of the Wealth-tax Act by the Commissioner of Wealth-tax, West Bengal-III, Calcutta, in respect of the assessment year 1976-77 in so far as the said order disallowed the claim of Rs. 1,05,274 being the wealth-tax liability as deductible in computing the net wealth of the petitioner, It is stated that, for the assessment year 1976-77, the petitioner filed two returns of wealth, one in the capacity of an individual showing a net wealth of Rs. 9,42,740 and the other in the capacity of a private trust showing a net wealth of Rs. 2,31,680. The Wealth-tax Officer is alleged to have passed a single assessment order clubbing the wealth under the two returns filed by the petitioner and computed the net wealth of the petitioner at Rs. ...
income-tax Officer Vs. Jayantilal Meghani.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-23-1990
Reported in: [1990]33ITD603(Cal)
ORDERPer Shri Vimal Gandhi, J. M. - The appeal by the revenue for assessment year 1979-80 is directed against order of the AAC cancelling penalty imposed on the assessee under section 271(1) (c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act). The assessee has filed cross objection in support of the order of the AAC. The assessee filed his return of income for assessment year 1979-80 on 27-6-1979 declaring an income of Rs. 41,550. The department in a search operation carried on office as well as residential premises of the assessee on 19-8-1981 seized certain books of accounts and documents. The ITO asked the assessee to explain certain descrepancies found in the regular books of account and documents seized in the search. Before the ITO Shri A. P. Methani, authorised representative of the assessee stated that he was unable to explain the discrepancies without the help of proprietor who was away to Bombay. The ITO made an addition of Rs. 29,851 with the following remark :'Add : Total of sundry d...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Shree Export House Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-22-1990
Reported in: [1992]194ITR695(Cal)
Suhas Chandra Sen, J.1. The Tribunal has referred the following two questions of law to this court under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that interest on the loan advanced to Newspaper Ltd., was not part of the real income of the assessee and was, therefore, not liable to be assessed to tax ?2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the interest forgone by the company was for commercial expediency and that should be treated as business expenditure in computation of the income of the assessee for the assessment year 1980-81 ?'2. The assessment year involved is 1980-81 for which the relevant accounting period ended on March 31, 1980.3. The facts narrated by the Tribunal in the statement are as follows :'The assessee-company filed its return on June 17, 1980 showing 'nil' income. In the course of examination of th...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Dunlop India Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-22-1990
Reported in: (1992)103CTR(Cal)422
ORDER--Capital not correctly computed for s. 80J--Question relating to controversy of ignoring losses while computing depreciation, etc.--Answer to question declined as it did not arise out of order of Tribunal.HELD :The question that has been referred relates to ignoring the losses worked out for the purpose of depreciation allowance, development rebate, etc., for the past assessment year in respect of new industrial undertaking. This question was not argued nor decided by the Tribunal and was not even taken in the grounds of appeal before the Tribunal. The only point that was raised was in connection with the method of computation of capital. No question has been raised on this aspect of the matter. Therefore, the controversy sought to be raised does not arise out of the order of the Tribunal.Income Tax Act 1961 s.80J ...
Gobardhan Chakraborty and Others Vs. Abani Mohan and Another
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-21-1990
Reported in: AIR1991Cal195,94CWN614
1. These appeals are directed against the judgment and decree dated June 10, 1972 passed by the Additional District Judge, 10th Court, Alipore, in Title Appeals Nos.593 of 1971 and 658 of 1971 affirming those dated April 30, 1971 passed by the Munsif, 3rd Court of Baruipur 24-Parganas in Title Suit No. 290 of 1969.2. The defendant No. 1 has preferredS. A. No. 86 of 1973 while defendant No. 2 has preferred S.A. 1788 of 1972 and plaintiff is the respondent No. I in both the appeals. These two appeals are taken up for hearing together.3. The plaintiff instituted the suit for dissolution of partnership and for accounts or in the alternative, for accounts of the dissolved firm and for final decree of accounting and also for appointment of a Receiver and also for injunction.4. The plaintiff's case, in brief, is as follows:--That the plaintiff and the defendants Nos. 1 and 2 are the partners of a Cinema business run under the name and style of Mahamaya Talkies at Dakshin Barasat; that the pla...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Hollungooree Tea Co.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-21-1990
Reported in: [1991]192ITR126(Cal)
Suhas Chandra Sen, J.1. The Tribunal has referred the following question of law under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, to this court:'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in deleting the addition of Rs. 11,49,000 made by the Income-tax Officer on account of undervaluation of closing stock of tea ?'2. In this case, the assessment year involved is 1978-79 for which the relevant year of account is the calendar year 1977.3. The facts found by the Tribunal, as stated in the statement of case, are as under ;'The assessee is a company and the assessment year involved is 1978-79 for which the relevant previous year is the calendar year 1977. The dispute centred round the Income-tax Officer's addition of Rs. 11,49,000 being the undervaluation of closing stock of tea consequent to the change effected in the method of valuation as recorded by the auditors of the assessee-company, vide Schedule 11. The report of the auditors was as follo...
Ratan Exports and Ind. Ltd. Vs. Assistant Collector of Customs
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-21-1990
Reported in: 1992(62)ELT501(Cal)
B.P. Banerjee, J.1. This writ petition has been tiled challenging the validity of the demand made by the Assistant Collector of Customs for Group-7 (DEEC Cell) dated 10th June, 1987 whereby the petitioners were directed to pay customs duly on pulp amounting to Rs. 8,22,610.897- on the ground that the petitioners imported 44.963 M.T. of Strawberry Pulp and the item and pulp according to the respondents did not conform in the list of items specified in Annexure -1 to Appendix -19 and that the Duty Exemption Entitlement Certificate benefit was wrongly extended to the petitioner with regard to the pulp since the same was not covered by the Notification No. 117/78-Cus., dated 9-6-1978 as also all proceedings framed thereunder.2. The facts relevant for the purpose of this case are as follows :3. The petitioner company had been carrying on business as Merchant Exporter exporting various goods to foreign countries. On and from 22nd July, 1982 the petitioner company started carrying on business...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Hindusthan Co-operative Insurance Socie ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-20-1990
Reported in: [1993]201ITR716(Cal)
Suhas Chandra Sen, J.1. The Tribunal has referred to this court the following questions of law under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 :' 1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that, for the purpose of computing the fair market value of the capital asset of the assessee under Section 55(2) Of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the surplus to be taken into consideration was 3V: per cent., which was the minimum permissible under Explanation 2 to paragraph 1 of Part A of the First Schedule to the Life Insurance Corporation Act, 1956, and not the surplus allocated by the assessee to the shareholder during the relevant period ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and on a proper interpretation of Section 55(1)(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the Tribunal was right in holding that there was improvement in the capital asset of the assessee after January 1, 1954 ? 3. Whether there was any evidence to support th...
Murari Mohan Ghose and anr. Vs. Balailal Adak and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-20-1990
Reported in: (1990)1CALLT432(HC)
Mukul Gopal Mukherjee, J.1. The defendant Nos. 1(a) and 1(c) who are the son and widow of one Bejoy Krishna Ghosh, deceased, impugned in the present appeal the judgment and decree dated 23rd August, 1979 in Title Suit No. 127 of 1975 passed by the learned Judge, 12th Bench, City Civil Court at Calcutta. By the said judgment and decree the suit for declaration of title and recovery of possession as filed by the plaintiffs Balailal Adak and Dr. Probhakar Chandra Mondal stood decreed against the present appellants and the respondent Nos. 3, 4 and 5, the heirs and legal representatives of the original defendant Bejoy Krishna Ghosh who died during the pendency of the suit. The suit property originally belonged to one Surendra Nath Ghosh. The said Surendra Nath Ghosh became the sole owner of the property situate at 27, Abinash Ghosh Lane by virtue of a deed of Partition effected amicably between his co-sharers and himself. On 13th January, 1929 the said Surendra Nath Ghosh executed a Will wh...
Gillanders Arbuthnot and Company Ltd. Vs. State of West Bengal and ors ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-20-1990
Reported in: (1991)1CALLT193(HC),94CWN806
Kalyanmoy Ganguli, J.1. The Court: In this application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner originally challenged an award passed on February 6, 1989 by the 5th Industrial Tribunal, West Bengal in case No. VIII-56, 1979 which is annexure T to the writ petition. By a supplementary application filed with the leave of the Court, the petitioner has also challenged the connected order of reference being Order No. 1037-IR/IR/11L-406/78 dated 14.3.79 of the Government of West Bengal, Labour Department.2. The matter was hotly contested by the respondent No. 3, the union of the workmen of the petitioner by filing affidavits.3. The issues were referred by the Government to the 5th Industrial Tribunals, West Bengal hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal. The petitioner has come up against the decision made in respect of issue No. 2 only which is as follows :-'Whether the demand for payment of House Rent Allowance to these workmen who are residing in tin sheds is justifi...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »