Kolkata Court February 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.
Steel Authority of India Ltd. and anr. Vs. Sudhendu Kumar Chakraborty ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-11-1991
Reported in: (1991)1CALLT318(HC)
Umesh Chandra Banerjee, J.1. In this stay application Mr. Som, learned Advocate appearing for the appellant/petitioners submitted that the learned trial Judge has erred in placing total reliance on the date of birth as appearing in the School Final Certificate produced by the writ petitioner long after his entry into service.2. On the factual score it appears that the petitioner has produced a school Final certificate as a private candidate and it is on that score Mr. Som, learned Counsel submitted that the certificate recording the date of birth of a private candidate cannot be taken with that much trust and confidence so as to declare the age correctly. Regular student and private candidate cannot be placed or equated in so far as the record of date of birth is concerned. Mr. Som, learned counsel submitted that in the case of regular student recording of date of birth is maintained in the school register and on the basis thereof school Final Certificate is issued by the Higher Second...
Ganges Manufacturing Co. Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-11-1991
Reported in: 1992(40)ECC325,1991(54)ELT65(Cal)
Ruma Pal, J.1. The petitioner No. 1 carries on the business of manufacturing jute goods under licence granted by the Central Excise Authority under the Central Excises & Salt Act, 1944 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act). The petitioner manufactured Pack Sheets for export for the period ranging between 1-11-1974 to March, 1981.2. Three separate show cause notices were issued to the petitioner. The dates of the show cause notices and period for which the excise duty was sought to be claimed are set out below :-(i) SCN dated 26-5-1981 ... 1-11-1974 to 31-3-1979. (ii) SCN dated 12-5-1981 ... November to Dec. 1980. (iii) SCN dated 2-7-1981 ... February to March, 1981.All the said three show cause notices were issued under Section 11A of the Act.3. On 28-10-1980 Notification No. 168/80 was published by which pack sheets used for the purpose of packing jute consignments for export were wholly exempted from excise duty.4. By a letter dated 22-6-1981 the petitioner replied to the first s...
AmIn Chand Payarelal Vs. Inspecting Assistant Commissioner and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-08-1991
Reported in: [1992]194ITR511(Cal)
Susanta Chatterji, J.1. The present rule was issued on October 11, 1977, at the instance of the writ petitioner, a registered partnership firm praying, inter alia, for an appropriate writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to withdraw and/or rescind the order dated September 26, 1974, passed by respondent No. 2, Commissioner of Income-tax, Central-I, in the penalty proceeding under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and the imposition of penalty under Section 271(1)(c) and, consequently, the demand notice, under Section 156 and the penalty order dated October 7, 1974, for the assessment years 1959-60 to 1965-66 passed by respondent No. 4, Inspecting Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Range-V (Central), and the order dated October 3, 1977, passed by respondent No. 1, Inspecting Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Range-I (Central), and all subsequent proceedings thereto and thereunder on the ground that the Income-tax Officer not having been satisfied in the course ...
J.B. Shah Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-08-1991
Reported in: 1993LC221(Calcutta),1991(55)ELT333(Cal)
Ruma Pal, J.1. The Court: The petitioner carries on the business of importing ball bearings under the name & style of M/s. Continental Corporation.2. The petitioner imported two consignments of ball bearings. One consignment arrived in Calcutta aboard the vessel 'TIGER CREEK'. Another consignment arrived in Calcutta aboard the 'MURRAY EVERETT'. The first consignment with which we are concerned in this writ petition (hereinafter referred to as the consignment) arrived on 1-11-1990. A bill of entry was filed by the petitioner's clearing agent on the same date. According to the petitioner, the'ball bearings imported were covered by their import licence dated 31-3-1989. It appears that the Customs Authorities were not willing to clear the ball bearings described as 1209K on the ground that it was a restricted item under Appendix - 2B of the Import Export Policy 1990-91. The petitioner dispute the contention and states that the import of 1209K ball bearings was permissible being under item ...
Sri Bhadreswar Pandit and Others Vs. Smt. Puspa Rani Pandit
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-07-1991
Reported in: AIR1991Cal405
1. This is a defendant's appeal against a judgment and decree passed by the Sub-Judge, Second Court, Howrah, reversing a decree of dismissal passed by the Munsif, 4th Court, Howrah. The facts of the case is as follows:2. The plaintiff-respondent filed the suit in the Munsifs Court for evicting the defendant-appellant from the suit property claiming him to be a licensee therein. The plaintiffs case was that the suit property described in Schedule 'A' to the plaint originally belonged to one Sankar Kumar Patra who was a thicka tenant by erecting structures thereon. The said Sankar Patra sold his thicka tenancy right in respect of the entire 'A' Schedule property to one Satish Chandra Pandit, son of Manmatha Ch. Pandit, by a registered sale deed dated 22-2-67. While in possession of the property the said Satish Ch. Pandit inducted the defendant who is his own brother, there asa licensee. The plaintiff purchased the 'B' Schedule property put of the 'A' Schedule property from Satish Ch Pand...
Mousumi Chakraborty Vs. Subrata Guha Roy
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-07-1991
Reported in: 95CWN380,II(1991)DMC74
Bhagawati Prasad Banerjee, J.1. This is an appeal filed by the appellant/ petitioner, who, filed a petition under Section 12 of the Hindu Marriage Act praying for a declaration that there was no marriage between her and the respondent under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1956 and that the purported registration under Section 8 of the Hindu Marriage Act dated 26th December, 1987 was a nullity. The Suit filed by her was dismissed by the learned District Judge, 13th Court, Alipore by an order and Judgment dated 19th January, 1990 passed in Matrimonial Suit No. 19 of 1988:2. The case of the appellant/petitioner in short may be stated as follows :The appellant was a student of B.A. Class in Vidyasagar College, Calcutta and the respondent was also a student of B.Sc Class in the said College and that during their study .in the said College, the appellant/petitioner and the respondent developed, a friendly relation between them and that the appellant/petitioner mixed with the respondent in free mind ...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Holman Climax Manufacturing Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-05-1991
Reported in: [1992]196ITR698(Cal)
Ajit K. Sengupta, J.1. At the instance of the Revenue, the following two questions of law have been referred to this court under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 1981-82 :' (1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the payment of annual special incentive, of Rs. 1,17,714 was production bonus and does not come under the purview of the Payment of Bonus Act, 1965 ?(2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the payment of monthly incentive bonus amounting to Rs. 5,56,963 was production bonus and does not come under the purview of the Payment of Bonus Act, 1965 '2. Shortly stated, the facts are that, for the assessment year under consideration, the assessee-company had allocable surplus of Rs. 3,35,766 within the meaning of the Payment of Bonus Act, 1965. Even then, the assessee paid profit-sharing bonus to the extent of R...
Commissioner of Wealth-tax Vs. Ramnarayan Bhojnagarwala
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-05-1991
Reported in: (1992)104CTR(Cal)50,[1992]194ITR489(Cal)
Ajit K. Sengupta, J. 1. In this reference under Section 27(1) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, for the assessment years 1975-76 and 1976-77, 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 law in annulling the order of the Commissioner of Wealth-tax and in holding that the decision in the case of Ganga Properties reported in : [1979]118ITR447(Cal) , applies to the facts of the case ?'2. The facts relating to this reference shortly stated are that the assessment for the assessment year 1975-76 was completed on March 6, 1980, whereas the assessment for the assessment year 1976-77 was completed on January 16, 1981. In both the assessment orders, an item of Rs. 4,45,000 has been included under the head 'Immovable property' and this is described as the value of Jaipur land as per return. Subsequently, the assessee filed an application for a clearance certificate under Section 230A of the Inc...
The Board of Trustees for the Port of Calcutta Vs. Sunshine Enterprise ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-05-1991
Reported in: (1992)1CALLT355(HC)
Prabir Kumar Majumdar, J.1. This is an application Under Sections 30 and 33 of the Arbitration Act for setting aside an award dated 15th May 1990 made and published by the Sole Arbitrator Mr. D. M. Mukherjee in the arbitration matter being Award Case No. 380 of 1990.2. Sometime in August 1983 the respondent was allotted the work by the petitioner for supplying and laying 150 mm dia inlet pipeline from additional tube well to the R. C. Overhead reservoir at Raichawk Fish Harbour. The value of the contract was to the extent of Rs. 67,555/-. In November, 1983 a formal agreement was entered into and the contract included the Tender, General Conditions of Contract, Special Conditions of Contract, Condition of Contract, Conditions of Tender specifications, Bill of quantities and Schedule of rates.3. Disputes and differences, however, arose between the parties in respect of the said contract entered into by and between the parties. By a letter dated 31st January, 1987 the respondent being the...
Lady Ranu Mookherjee (Executrix to the Estate of Late Sir Biren Mookhe ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-04-1991
Reported in: [1992]198ITR418(Cal)
ORDER--Order passed in pursuance of direction of CWT in revision but without complying therewith--Not a nullity--Appellate authority competent to set aside the same and direct redoing.HELD :When a specific direction of the superior authority is not carried out, whatever the reason might be, the assessment made in pursuance thereof cannot be said to be a proper assessment but it cannot be said to be a nullity, inasmuch as the appellate authority has the power and jurisdiction to set aside the assessment for compliance with the direction given earlier so that no injustice is caused to the assessee. Since the WTO, without giving any opportunity to the assessee, estimated the valuation, the assessment suffered from infirmity and, accordingly, it was the duty of the Tribunal to refer the matter to the WTO with a direction to complete the assessment afresh which, in fact, has been done. APPLICATION :Also to current assessment years. Ajit K. Sengupta, J.1. The judgment and order dated Januar...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »