Kolkata Court January 1991 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.
Uttara Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. Vs. State of West Bengal and ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-22-1991
Reported in: (1991)1CALLT441(HC)
Ajay Nath Roy, J.1. This is an application challenging the Award of an Arbitrator appointed under Sections 86 and 87 of the West Bengal Co-operative Societies Act, 1973, which Award has been substantially upheld by the Tribunal also constituted under the said Act.2. The said two Awards or Orders in effect rescind the order of expulsion passed against the respondent No. 5 by the Managing Committee of the Uttara Co-operative Housing Society Ltd.3. By a show-cause notice, which is annexure A to the petition, the Co-operative asked for an explanation from the 5th respondent regarding' persistent default of money payments. Thereafter, after giving a due hearing to the 5th respondent, the expulsion order was passed and the same is dated 10th July, 1984, and is annexure B to the instant petition.4. Both the learned Arbitrator and the Tribunal have reappraised the evidence and have come to the conclusion that expulsion should not have been ordered. They have entered into facts and they have en...
The Fort William Co. Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-18-1991
Reported in: 1992(40)ECC96,1991(54)ELT13(Cal)
ORDERRuma Pal, J.1. The dispute involved in this application revolves around the interpretation of the phrase 'specified goods' in Notification No. 198/76 dated June 16,1976.2. The facts of the case are undisputed. The Petitioner No. 1 has been manufacturing Wire ropes since 1962. With effect from 1-4-1973 Wire rope was included for the first time as Tariff Item No. 63 in the first Schedule to the Central Excises & Salt Act, 1944 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act) by the Finance Act, 1973.3. By Notification No. 198/76 dated June 16, 1976, certain exemptions in the payment of Excise duty were granted in respect of 43 excisable goods. Wire rope was included as one of the 43 excisable goods. The exemption was granted in respect of excisable goods cleared in excess of the base clearance by or on behalf of a manufacturer. Paragraph 12(2) of the said Notification, in so far it is relevant provides as follows:(2) After comparing the clearance of specified goods under sub-paragraph (1) ...
Prabir Kumar Majumdar Vs. Assistant Collector, Central Excise
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-18-1991
Reported in: 1992(60)ELT533(Cal)
Ruma Pal, J.1. Subsequent to the passing of the order yesterday, it was pointed out by the petitioners that the bank guarantee had been kept renewed. As such I recall the order and dispose of the writ petition on merits. The writ petitioner has challenged a demand of the respondent No. 1 for excise duty in respect of the goods manufactured by him. An order dated 16-4-1985 passed by the Respondent No. 1 directing payment of excise duty was challenged by the petitioner in an appeal to the Collector. During the pendency of the said appeal, the petitioner moved an application under Article 226 of the Constitution before this Court. An order was passed staying realisation of the duty claimed pending the said appeal subject to the petitioner depositing a sum of Rs. 50,0007-and furnishing a bank guarantee for the amount claimed. The said appeal was dismissed and the demand as contained in the order dated 16-4-1985 was upheld by the Collector. The petitioner thereafter filed an appeal from the...
Satya Narayan Tantia and ors. Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-15-1991
Reported in: (1991)1CALLT405(HC)
Khwaja Mohammad Yusuf, J.1. The President, 'the Secretary, the Headmaster and other Members of the Managing Committee of Tantia High School, Calcutta, have moved the writ application challenging the Memo dated 25th June, 1985 issued by the Assistant Secretary to the Government of West Bengal, Labour Department, referring the dispute between the petitioners and the respondent No. 5, Ram Saran Mahato, to an Industrial Tribunal under Section 10 read with Section 2A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, The petitioners' case, in short, is that respondent No. 5 was appointed as a Peon by the then authority of the School in or about 1960. Before his suspension he used to draw a total remuneration of Rs. 575.45. During his service hours he used to come heavily drunk. The Secretary received on 12th February, 1981 a complaint from the Assistant Secretary, Barabazar Library, in February 1981 on the occasion of Kavi Sammelon Utsav Day that seven pairs of shoes were stolen and the allegation was t...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Benaras Electric Light and Power Co. Lt ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-14-1991
Reported in: [1993]204ITR804(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 question has been referred to this court :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was correct in law in holding that the expenses relating to salary and wages and rent would have to be allowed in full and thereby directing the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) to compute the deduction of these two items accordingly ?'2. Shortly stated, the facts are :The matter arises out of the income-tax assessment of the assessee for the assessment year 1980-81, the accounting period ending on March 31, 1980. The assessee-company was under voluntary liquidation since the Government took over the business of the assessee. The assessee had income only from interest during the year in question. The Income-tax Officer, while assessing the company, disallowed a portion of the assessee's expenditure out of salary and wages...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Surama Tubes (P.) Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-14-1991
Reported in: [1993]201ITR124(Cal)
Ajit K. Sengupta, J.1. In this reference under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 1982-83, 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 right in law in concluding that the plant and machinery of Rs. 3,79,793 were new and the installation of them was completed during the accounting year relevant to the assessment year 1982-83 ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and having regard to the fact that there was a change in the shareholding of the assessee-company, the Tribunal was right in law in allowing carry forward of the unabsorbed depreciation and unabsorbed investment allowance under Section 79 of the Income-tax Act, 1961?' 2. The assessee is a private limited company which owns a factory at Jhargram with its head office at Calcutta and had no manufacturing business of its own with its own machinery since its incorporation. B...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Chloride India Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-14-1991
Reported in: [1992]193ITR355(Cal)
AJIT K. SENGUPTA J. - This reference under section 256 (1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, relates to the assessment year 1981-82.Shortly stated the facts are that in the assessment framed by the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner (Assessment) for the assessment year 1981-82, he allowed weighted deduction under section 35B of the Income tax Act, 1961, on several items of expenditure including the expenditure of Rs. 92,326 incurred by the assessee-company on payment of commission to overseas agents for export promotion.The Commissioner of Income-tax, on an examination of the assessment records of the assessee, took the view that weighted deduction on the expenditure incurred on payment of commission to overseas agents has been wrongly allowed and that the assessment order on the point was erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. Therefore, a show-cause notice under section 263 was, accordingly, issued to the assessee. After considering the submissions made on behalf of the ...
Chandipore Fisheries Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-11-1991
Reported in: [1992]195ITR565(Cal)
Ajit K. Sengupta, J. 1. In this reference under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the following questions of law have been referred to this court for the assessment year 1979-80 :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the fixed deposits were not transferred to the shareholders and that the interest income of Rs. 31,105 (after deduction of expenses) on the said fixed deposits was assessable in the hands of the assessee ?2. Whether in the event of absence of transfer of the said fixed deposits, the Tribunal should have held that the interest income from the said fixed deposits could be assessed in the hands of the assessee only as trustee for the shareholders to whom the fixed deposits were handed over ?'2. Shortly stated, the facts are that the assessee is a company which has been carrying on fishery business for a long time. For availing of the benefits of Section 54E of the Act, the assessee made fixed deposit o...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Toolsidass Jewraj
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-11-1991
Reported in: [1991]192ITR568(Cal)
Ajit K. Sengupta, J. 1. This reference at the instance of the Revenue relates to the assessment year 1982-83. The question of law which has been referred to us is as follows : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the requirement of Rule 24 read with Rule 22(5) of the Income-tax Rules were satisfied and the assessee was entitled to continuation of registration under Section 184(7) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, on the basis of declaration in Form No. 12 filed on July 30, 1982 ?' 2. The facts are in a narrow compass. In the assessment year 1982-83, the assessee-firm comprised six partners. The firm was treated as a registered firm under Section 185(1) of the Act. For claiming benefit of continuation of registration, the assessee-firm filed a declaration in Form No. 12 on July 30, 1982. The said declaration was not signed by one of the partners, namely, Lakshmidass Toolsidass. The Income-tax Officer granted continuation o...
Raja Baldeodas Birla Santatikosh Vs. Commissioner of Wealth-tax
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-09-1991
Reported in: [1991]189ITR613(Cal)
Ajit K. Sengupta, J.1. In this reference under Section 27(1) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, for the assessment years 1984-85 to 1986-87, the following common questions of law have been referred to this court:'(1) Whether the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in remanding the matter to the Assistant Commissioner of Wealth-tax to enable the Assistant Commissioner of Wealth-tax to make a reference to the Valuation Officer under Section 16A of the Wealth-tax Act ? (2) Whether the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is empowered under the provisions of the Wealth-tax Act to extend the time limit prescribed for completion of the assessment by remanding the matter to the Assistant Commissioner of Wealth-tax to make a reference under Section 16A of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957?' 2. Shortly stated, the facts are that the assessee, inter alia, held 19,997 shares of Jaipur Finance and Diary Products Pvt. Ltd. In the wealth-tax return, the assessee declared the value of these shares at Rs. 111.06 pe...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »