Kolkata Court June 1991 Judgments
Bachraj Baid Vs. State of West Bengal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-28-1991
Reported in: [1992]74CompCas809(Cal)
Jyotirindra Nath Hore, J.1. These two matters have been heard together and this judgment will govern both.2. Criminal Revision No. 375 of 1985 arises out of an application under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code for quashing the impugned proceeding being C/2894 of 1983 under Section 220(3) of the Companies Act, 1956, pending before the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Seventh Court, Calcutta.3. The petitioner is a director of Clyde Fan Company Private Limited. Shri S.K. Bhattacherjee, the Assistant Registrar of Companies, West Bengal, filed a complaint before the learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Calcutta, alleging, inter alia, that the annual general meeting of the company should have been held in accordance with the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956, on or before June 30, 1983, and the balance-sheet and profit and loss account of the company for the year ending on December 31, 1982, were required to be filed under Section 220(1) of the Companies Act in the office ...
Tag this Judgment!E.S.i.C. Vs. Smt. Ichraj Devi Chopra and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-28-1991
Reported in: (1991)2CALLT275(HC),[1991(63)FLR807],(1992)IILLJ132Cal
Ajit Kumar Nayak, J. 1. These appeals by Special Leave under Section 378(4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, heard analogously, are directed at the instance of Employees' State Insurance Corporation (represented by the Insurance Inspector) against the orders of acquittal dated December 19, 1984, passed by learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 9th Court, Calcutta, acquitting the accused-opposite party in cases brought under Section 85(a) and (g) of the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948.2. The aforesaid two cases were brought by the petitioner-Insurance Inspector, Employees' State Insurance Corporation, on two separate complaints before the learned Chief Metropolitan, Calcutta, against the manager and the other directors of a factory namely M/s. Pradeep Automobiles (P) Ltd. 19, Goabagan Street, Calcutta-6, on the accusation that the manager and the directors of the said factory had failed to submit contribution cards in requisite form for the period expiring on September 29, 1973 and Nov...
Tag this Judgment!Bhagabati Charan Banerjee and ors. Vs. Muktipada Chandra and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-28-1991
Reported in: (1992)1CALLT289(HC),96CWN249
Amulya Kumar Nandi, J.1. A short question comes up for decision before this court. Title Suit No. 37/76 in the 1st court of Munsif at Durgapur was dismissed for default on the 1st of February, 1982. A Misc. case being No. 35/82 under Order 9 Rule 9 C.P.C. was filed on 25th of February, 1982. During the pendency of the Misc. Case the original petitioner died and his legal representatives were duly substituted. The Misc. Case ultimately succeeded and the suit was restored to file. The legal representatives of the deceased petitioner filed a petition Under Section 151 C.P.C. asking the court to substitute the petitioners, namely the legal representatives of the original plaintiff, now deceased, in the suit. The trial court relied upon a single bench decision in Salil Kumar v. Sailendra Nath reported in : AIR1960Cal203 to reject the application by an impugned order No. 116 dated 13.9.88. The said order is now challenged before me.2. The learned Judge in Salil Kumar's case (Supra) opined th...
Tag this Judgment!Sri Pronab Kumar Mukherjee Vs. Allahabad Bank and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-26-1991
Reported in: (1992)2CALLT146(HC)
Mahitosh Majumdar, J.1. This writ application is directed against the disciplinary proceeding including the order of dismissal in terms of the charge-sheet dated 21.10.86. The petitioner further prays for a direction upon the respondents to cancel, withdraw and/or rescind the purported order of removal being D/A Order No. Cal Br/1/87 dated 19.1.87 being Annexure 'G' to the petition.2. The facts of the present case, in brief, are that at the material time the petitioner was posted at the Calcutta Main Branch of the Bank and worked as Officer-in-Charge of the Extension Counter at the Head Office, The Counter was run by the petitioner along with the two cashiers, two clerks and one peon. The petitioner was required to supervise the work of the Extension Counter including passing of cheques of the Accounts of Staff of the office and other miscellaneous vouchers pertaining to the Head Office. The petitioner's main functions in the Extension Counter may be summed up as follows :-(i) to maint...
Tag this Judgment!Vipul Ishwarlal Vora Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-26-1991
Reported in: 1992(60)ELT248(Cal)
Ruma Pal, J.1. The subject matter of challenge in this writ petition is the failure of the Customs Authorities to assess and clear the goods imported by the petitioner. According to the petitioner what were imported were the parts of Air-conditioners. The . goods arrived in India in October, 1990. According to the petitioners the goods were examined by the Customs Authorities and found to be classifiable under Tariff Heading 8414.30 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975. It is the petitioners complaint that in spite of the aforesaid the respondents were refusing to release the said goods or finally assess the same.2. An interim order was passed by this court to the following effect:'In this application, the writ petitioner has complained about the inaction of the respondent further authorities in assessing the duty leviable in respect of the consignment in question. The respondent Authorities appearing through their counsel have no objection if a time bound schedule is fixed for assessing th...
Tag this Judgment!Sardar Gurcharan Singh Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-26-1991
Reported in: 1992(59)ELT355(Cal)
ORDERRuma Pal, J.1. This case arises out of the Duty Entitlement Scheme evolved by the Government of India as part of its Import and Export Policy. These policies are formulated periodically. The policy which this case relates to is the Import and Export Policy 1988-91. The provisions relating to the Duty Exemption Scheme are contained in Appendix 19 of the policy printed for the period in question.2. The Duty Entitlement Scheme essentially was formulated as an impetus for exports. An exporter is entitled to import duty free material subject to terms and conditions specified in the relevant policy. The conditions relevant for this case include the obtaining of an appropriate licence. One of the kinds of licences is an advance licence. Such advance licences are granted to manufacturer exporters, inter alia, holding valid export orders in their names. The Advance Licence allows such exporter-manufacturers to import duty free material which are utilised for the manufacture of the proposed...
Tag this Judgment!inmark Finance and Investment Co. Pvt. Ltd. and anr. Vs. Metropolitan ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-25-1991
Reported in: [1993]76CompCas155(Cal)
Nirendra Krishna Mitra, J.1. In this writ application, the petitioners have challenged the complaint case No. 84G /B of 1989 arising out of a complaint lodged by respondent No. 2 before the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 28 Court, Bombay, so far as the writ petitioners are concerned.2. Shorn of all details, the facts as stated by the petitioners in the writ application, inter alia, are that petitioner No. 1 is a private company and carries on business as a finance and investment company at 95, Park Street, Calcutta-700 016, within the territorial jurisdiction of this Hon'ble court and petitioner No. 2 is a shareholder and director of petitioner No. 1 company. In the month of March, 1989, respondent No. 3 approached petitioner No. 1 for a loan and/or advance of rupees two lakhs which was sanctioned after negotiation, and at the request of respondent No. 3, petitioner No. 1 issued two cheques of rupees one lakh each in the name of respondent No. 2 under the signature of petitioner No. ...
Tag this Judgment!Director of Income-tax (Exmp.) Vs. Girdharilal ShewnaraIn Tantia Trust
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-25-1991
Reported in: [1993]199ITR215(Cal)
Ajit K. Sengupta, J.1. In this reference under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 1981-82, the following question of law has been referred to this court :' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in the light of the proper interpretation of Section 11 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the Tribunal is justified in holding that the capital gain amounting to Rs. 2,91,644 is eligible for deduction under Section 80T of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?'2. The facts leading to this reference are that the assessee is a trust assessed to tax in respect of the capital gain of Rs. 2,91,644 on sale of shares. The Assessing Officer rejected the assessee's claim for deduction under Section 80T of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) declined to interfere in the matter. On an examination of the facts and in the circumstances of the case and on interpretation of the relevant provisions of the Act, the Tribunal held that :' The ...
Tag this Judgment!Gour Kishore Das Vs. Krishna Kumar Bose
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-25-1991
Reported in: (1991)2CALLT267(HC)
Jyotirindra Nath Hore, J.1. This revisional application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is directed against the order dated 3.9.90 passed by the Rent Controller, Calcutta in A.R.C. Case No. 5 of 1989 (Fine) directing the petitioner-landlord to cause restoration of normal supply of filtered water in the tenanted premises within one month from the date of the order.2. The opposite party is a tenant in respect of two rooms, kitchen and privy in the first floor of premises No. 140A, Harish Mukherjee Road under the petitioner at a monthly rental of Rs. 200/- payable according to English calendar months. The tenant-opposite party filed an application Under Section 31 of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1956 against the petitioner before the Rent Controller, Calcutta alleging wilful obstruction in the supply line of filtered water by operation of stop cock. On receipt of summons the petitioner appeared on 12.2.90 but the tenant-opposite party who was the petitioner in the ...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Arcuttipore Tea Co. Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-24-1991
Reported in: [1992]197ITR588(Cal)
Ajit K. Sengupta, J.1. In this reference under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 1984-85, the following question of law has been referred to this court :'Whether, on, the facts and in the circumstances of the case and also having regard to the specific provisions of Section 36(1)(ii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the Tribunal was correct in law in holding that the payment of bonus as per bipartite agreement cannot be called as bonus as it was made for the purpose of the business and deductible under Section 37(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961?'2. The facts relating to this reference are that, in its books of account relating to the year of accounting ending on March 31, 1983, the assessee had made a provision in respect of the minimum bonus payable to its workers for the said year under the Payment of Bonus Act. Therefore, as a result of a bipartite agreement dated September 22, 1988, the assessee paid a further sum of Rs. 56,888 to its employees. The sai...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »