Skip to content

Kolkata Court October 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.

Oct 01 1991

Raja Mookherjee and ors. Vs. Wealth-tax Officer and ors.

Court: Kolkata

Decided on: Oct-01-1991

Reported in: [1993]204ITR276(Cal)

Ruma Pal, J. 1. Sir R.N. Mukherjee was a well-known industrialist. Sir R.N. Mukherjee died having executed a will under which he appointed an executor for administration of his estate. One Rabindra Nath Mukherjee being the grandson of Sir R.N. Mukherjee was entitled to one-third share in the estate of Sir R.N. Mukherjee (deceased). However, before the estate of Sir R.N. Mukherjee (deceased) was fully administered, Rabindra Nath Mukherjee died on September 20, 1975. Rabindra Nath Mukherjee had married one Mahamaya. The four petitioners are the four children of Mahamaya and Rabindra Nath Mukherjee. The petitioners have challenged the assessment orders in respect of the years 1968-69 to 1975-76 under the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, in which the petitioners have been sought to be assessed in respect of Rabindra Nath Mukherjee's one-third share in his grandfather's estate. According to the petitioners, their father, Rabindra, till the date of his death, had not received any portion of his grandfa...


Oct 01 1991

Hamilton and Co. Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax

Court: Kolkata

Decided on: Oct-01-1991

Reported in: (1992)104CTR(Cal)95,[1992]194ITR391(Cal)

Ajit K. Sengupta, J. 1. In this reference under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the following question of law has been referred to this court pertaining to the assessment years 1982-83 and 1983-84 :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the additional or extra rent attributable to preceding years of account which could not be taxed under Section 22 of the Act should, instead, be taxed under the head 'Income from other sources ?'2. The facts giving rise to an identical question for both the years are as under :The assessee derives income, inter alia, from house property being the premises known as 'Hamilton House' at Connaught Place, New Delhi. Theassessee received an aggregate amount of Rs. 9,70,960 by way of rent from as many as six tenants. This rent is attributable to 12 months, comprised in the previous year ending October 31, 1981, relevant to the assessment year 1982-83. The said amount represented what may ...


Oct 01 1991

Tapan Pal and ors. Vs. State of West Bengal

Court: Kolkata

Decided on: Oct-01-1991

Reported in: (1991)2CALLT370(HC),I(1992)DMC380

Jyotirindra Nath Hore, J.1. The appellants were convicted under Sections 306 and 498-A, Indian Penal Code by the learned Assistant Sessions Judge, Kalna and for his conviction under Section 306, Indian Penal Code, appellantNo. 1 Tapan Pal was sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 71/2 years and pay a fine of Rs. 2,500/-, in default further simple imprisonment for 6 months and appellantNo. 2 Lakshmirani Pal was sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 5 years and to pay fine of Rs. 2,500/-, default, to suffer further simple imprisonment for 6 months. The fine, if realised, was ordered to be paid to P.W. 2 Sudharani Kumar, mother of the deceased. No separate sentence was passed under Section 498-A, Indian Penal Code, Swapan Pal and Puspita Pal younger brother and sister of appellant Tapan Pal respectively were found not guilty and acquitted of both the charges.2. Briefly stated, the prosecution case is as follows :Namita Pal, daughter of Late Abhoypada Kumar and P.W. 2 Sudha...


Oct 01 1991

Tapan Pal and ors. Vs. the State of W. Bengal

Court: Kolkata

Decided on: Oct-01-1991

Reported in: 1992CriLJ1017

J.N. Hore, J.1. The appellants were convicted under Sections 306 and 498A, Indian Penal Code by the learned Assistant Sessions Judge, Kalna and for his conviction under Section 306, Indian Penal Code, appellant No. 1 Tapan Pal was sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 71/2 years and pay a fine of Rs. 2,500/-, in default further simple imprisonment for 6 months and appellant No. 2 Lakshmirani Pal was sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 5 years and to pay fine of Rs. 2,500/-, in default, to suffer further simple imprisonment for 6 months. The fine, if realised, was ordered to be paid to P.W. 2 Subharani Kumar, mother of the deceased. No separate sentence was passed under Section 498A, Indian Penal Code. Swapan Pal and Puspita Pal younger brother and sister of appellant Tapan Pal respectively were found not guilty and acquitted of both the charges.2. Briefly stated, the prosecution case is as follows:--Namita Pal, daughter of Late Abhoypada Kumar and P.W. 2 Sudharani Kum...


  • Next ›

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial