Kolkata Court April 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.
Narayan Prasad Kundu Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-17-1990
Reported in: [1993]204ITR740(Cal)
Bhagabati Prasad Banerjee, J. 1. The following three questions of law of which two questions at the instance of the assessee and one question at the instance of the Revenue, have been referred to this court by the Tribunal under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 : Questions referred at the instance of the assessee : '(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in holding that the sum of Rs. 60,000 received by the assessee as compensation for loss of earnings from brick manufacturing business as mentioned in the award made by the Additional District Judge, Hooghly, represented a revenue receipt in the hands of the assessee for the assessment year 1967-68 (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in holding that the sum of Rs. 1,250 received by the assessee as compensation for readymade earth lying on the acquired portion as mentioned in the award of the Additional District Judge, Hoogh...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Davy Ashmore India Ltd. (Now Tata Ashmo ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-17-1990
Reported in: (1992)108CTR(Cal)246
SUHAS CHANDRA SEN, J. :Mr. Sukumar Bhattacharjee, Advocate appearing on behalf of the assessee has submitted that the name of the assessee company has been changed from Davy Ashmore India Ltd. to Tata Ashmore Ltd. Let the change be recorded.2. The Tribunal has referred the following question of law to this Court under s. 256(1) of the IT Act, 1961 :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and having regard to the Supreme Court decision in the case of India Overseas Bank Ltd. vs . CIT reported in : [1970]77ITR512(SC) , the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that investment allowance under s. 32A of the IT Act should be allowed to the assessee although the provisions of s. 32A(4)(ii) of the IT Act were not complied with ?'3. The assessment year involved is 1977-78 for which the relevant period of account is the year ended on 31st March, 1976.4. The Tribunal has found the following facts :'The reference relates to the point about non-allowance of investment allowa...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Jayantilal Sarkarlal Gandhi
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-16-1990
Reported in: [1995]212ITR154(Cal)
Suhas Chandra Sen, J.1. The following question of law has been referred by the Tribunal to this court under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act') :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the interest of Rs. 21,295awarded by the High Court in the appeal preferred by the assessee for enhanced compensation on the requisition of his house property by the Government was not interest but an ex gratia payment by way of compensation and in that view in deleting the aforesaid interest income added by the Income-tax Officer as income from other sources ?'2. The assessment year involved was 1980-81 for which the relevant previous year was the calendar year 1979.3. The assessee was the owner of the premises No. 50A, Theatre Road, Calcutta, which was requisitioned by the Government of West Bengal on March 23, 1961. The monthly compensation rent was fixed at Rs. 835 by the Land Acquisition Collector. The amount o...
Kamala Bala Garai Vs. Samar Sen
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-16-1990
Reported in: (1990)2CALLT20(HC)
Amulya Kumar Nandi, J.1. One Haricharan Bose was a tenant in respect of a premises comprised of 2 rooms, 1 kitchen, 1 bath and one privy in Holding No. 133, Keshab Chandra Sen Street. The plaintiff filed an ejectment suit No. 1364 of 1970 against the heirs of the said Haricharan including the mother of the present judgment-debtor Samar Sen. The judgment-debtor Samar Sen happens to be the son of one Pravabati who has been wrongly described as Rajlaxmi alias Rajubala in ejectment suit No. 1364 of 1970. The said ejectment suit ended in a decree on 6.1.72. It is stated that the judgment-debtors thereafter amicably vacated possession and the said premises was let out to Haricharan's grandson Samar Sen. The plaintiff filed ejectment suit No. 433 of 1974 against Samar Sen which was decreed in favour of the present plaintiff on 30.9.77. The judgment and decree were upheld in F.A. 140 of 1978 by this Court on 8.7.81. The plaintiff thereafter levied an execution being execution case No. 452 of 1...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Jayantilal Perkarlal Gandhi.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-16-1990
Reported in: (1992)107CTR(Cal)290
SUHAS CHANDRA SEN, J. :The following question of law has been referred by the Tribunal to this Court under s. 256(1) of the IT Act, 1961 :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the interest of Rs. 21,295 awarded by the High Court in the appeal preferred by the assessee for enhanced compensation on the acquisition of his house property by the Government was not interest but an ex gratia payment by way of compensation and in that view in deleting the aforesaid interest come added by the ITO as income from other sources ?'2. The assessment year involved was 1980-81 for which the relevant previous year was the calendar year 1979.3. The assessee was the ower of premises No. 50A, Theatre Road, Calcutta which was requisitioned by the Govt., of West Bengal on 23rd March, 1961. The monthly compensation rent was fixed at Rs. 835 by the Land Acquisition Collector. The amount of compensation was raised to Rs. 1200 per month by...
Geeta Bose and Another Vs. Machine Tools of India Ltd
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-12-1990
Reported in: AIR1991Cal116,(1991)1CALLT206(HC),1990(1)CHN526,94CWN1018
ORDERA.M. Bhattacharjee, J.1.Theapplication filed by the plaintiffs for leave to withdraw from the present suit with liberty to sue the defendant afresh ought to have been allowed and the impugned order, giving rise to this revision, rejecting the application, must be quashed.2. The plaintiff-petitioners, after acquiring the house in 1981, have filed the present suit in 1982 for eviction of the defendant-respondent on the ground of unauthorised subletting and several other grounds. The suit having been filed within three years of the acquisition of the house by the plaintiffs, could not be grounded on the reasonable requirements of the plaintiffs for own occupation, even if such a ground was then existing, in view of the provisions of subsection (3 A) of Section 13 of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1956, countermanding institution of suit on that ground before the expiry of such period. The period of three years has however expired during the pendency of the suit and on such exp...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. New India Sugar Mills Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-12-1990
Reported in: [1994]206ITR212(Cal)
Suhas Chandra Sen, J.1. The Tribunal has referred the following question of law to this court under Section 250(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in treating the contribution to Molasses Storage Reserve Fund created under the U. P. Sheera Niyantran (Sansodhan) Adesh, 1974, as a revenue expenditure ?'2. The assessment year is 1980-81 for which the relevant accounting year ended on June 30, 1979. The facts found by the Tribunal are as under:'The assessee is a limited company. The assessment year involved is 1980-81. The business of the assessee-company is manufacture and sale of sugar. During the relevant accounting year, the assessee-company made a reserve of Rs. 47,084 under the head 'Molasses Storage Reserve Fund' and claimed the same as revenue expenditure. The Income-tax Officer did not entertain the claim of the assessee in that regard.'3. On appeal, the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) held a...
Tarun Ranjan Majumdar and Another Vs. Siddhartha Datta
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-10-1990
Reported in: AIR1991Cal76,94CWN903,I(1991)DMC14
ORDERA.M. Bhattacharjee, J.1. The proceeding under S. 25 read with S. 12 and S. 7 of the Guardians and Wards Act 1890, giving rise to this appeal, appears to be a tug of war between the father on the one hand and the maternal grand-parents on the other, over the custody of a child who was aged about 11 months only when the proceeding was initiated in November, 1987. There should be no manner of doubt that a child of such tender age ought not to be subjected to tugging by zealous or jealous relations, whoever they may be, fighting with the bellicosity of relentless combatants. It is settled beyond doubt that in matters relating to custody of child, its not the legal right of the claimant which is decisive, but it is the welfare of the child which is the primary and paramount test and no one can recover custody of a child merely by, brandishing his legal right or financial affluence.2. An impression has gained ground, erroneous though, that once a legal guardian proves his lawful right t...
D.D.G. Hensa Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-09-1990
Reported in: [1993]204ITR687(Cal)
Suhas Chandra Sen, J.1. The Tribunal has referred the following two questions of law under Section 256(1) of the Act :'(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the deferred rebate of Rs. 10,30,731 allowed to the shippers was not admissible as a deduction from the gross amount of freight earnings before computation of the applicant's income from shipping business under Section 44B of the Income-tax Act ?(2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the special rebate of Rs. 2,36,024 allowed to Government and semi-Government shippers was not deductible from the amount of freight earnings for the purpose of determining the applicant's income from shipping business under Section 44B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?'2. The relevant year of assessment is 1978-79 for which the accounting year ended on December 31, 1977. In the statement of case, the Tribunal has recorded the fol...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Prabha Debi Bagaria
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-09-1990
Reported in: [1991]192ITR416(Cal)
Bhagabati Prasad Banerjee, 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 and in view of the 50% undivided share in the house property at No. 5/9, Mullick Street, Calcutta, donated by the assessee to Smt. Ratna Devi Bagaria Charity Trust not having been registered in favour of the trust during the relevant assessment years 1980-81 and 1981-82, the Tribunal was justified in deleting the income from the said property included in the assessment of the assessee ?'The year of assessment is 1980-81, for which the relevant period of account is the year ending on March 23, 1980.2. The facts of the case as narrated by the Tribunal in the statement of case are as follows :The assessee was owner of half the property at No. 5/9, Mullick Street, Calcutta. The other co-owner was Smt. Ratna Devi Bagaria who, by her last will and testament dated March 29, 1977, crea...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »