Kolkata Court July 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.
The Workmen of Birnagar Municipality Represented by the President of B ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-12-1991
Reported in: (1992)1CALLT1(HC)
Paritosh Kumar Mukherjee, J.1. This writ petition was moved on behalf of Workmen of the Birnagar Municipality represented by the President of the Birnagar Municipality Employees' Association, challenging the order No. 89 dated September 5, 1990.2. By the said order, which is annexure E to the petition, the Presiding Officer, 7th Industrial Tribunal had passed a longish order and allowed the petition of the Municipality dated July 24, 1990 on contest and directed that the parties are not allowed to adduce fresh evidence at this stage and directed the parties to come ready for arguments on the evidence and materials already on record, which has been impugned in the instant writ petition, by the Employees' Association of the Birnagar Municipality, (hereinafter referred to as the petitioner Association).3. Earlier, following dispute was referred by the State Government for adjudication to the aforesaid Tribunal, namely, 'Whether dismissal of Shri Bimalendu Paul, Smt. Shibani Dutta, Smt. Re...
Commissioner of Wealth-tax Vs. Brij Mohan Thapper
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-11-1991
Reported in: [1993]199ITR642(Cal)
Shyamal Kumar Sen, J.1. On an application under Section 27(1) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, the Tribunal has referred the following questions :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that, for the purpose of the valuation of unquoted shares of Messrs. Karam Chand Thapar and Bros. Ltd., an investment company, in accordance with the Central Board of Direct Taxes Circular No. 332A, dated March 31, 1982 (see [1982] 135 ITR 11), the net maintainable profit should be arrived at after deducting the provisions for pension and gratuity liabilities as provided in the balance-sheet ?'2. The facts shortly are as follows :The assessee is an individual. The assessment year involved is 1979-80 for which the valuation date was March 31, 1979. The assessee disclosed the value of the unquoted shares of Messrs. Karam Chand Thapar and Bros. Ltd. at Rs. 210 per share on the basis of a valuation report. The Wealth-tax Officer, however, valued the sha...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Air Conditioning Corporation Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-10-1991
Reported in: [1993]199ITR480(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 two questions of law have been referred to this court :' 1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the facts found by the learned Commissioner of Income lax (Appeals) were correct though theassessee company had not filed statement of advance tax as required under Section 209A(1)(a) of the Income tax Act, 1961 ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in upholding the order of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) cancelling the interest charged under Section 217(1A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, by the Assessing Officer for non-filing of the statement of advance tax under Section 209A(1)(a) ibid?' The facts leading to this reference are that, in the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer found that the company w...
Hariprasad Singh and ors. Vs. Director of Primary Education and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-09-1991
Reported in: (1991)2CALLT205(HC)
Dilip Kumar Basu, J.1. It appears from the endorsement dated 24th December, 1986 that the Rule is ready as regards service. None appears in support of the Rule. Inspite of service of the Rule nobody appears on behalf of the respondents. No return has been filed as yet.2. The petitioners-nine in number, who are appointed as assistant teachers by the managing committee of school in urban area of Malda District. On diverse dates sometime in the year 1974, 1976 and May, 1977, as routine exercise the Secretary of the Managing Committee of the respective schools submitted a statement along with a copy of relevant resolution to the Sub-Inspector of Schools, Primary Education, who in his turn forwarded to the District Inspector of Schools, Primary Education, Malda for necessary action. All these recommendations forwarded to the District Inspector of Schools, Primary Education, Malda, i.e. respondent No. 3, are Annexure 'A' collectively to the writ petition. On receipt of such statement from th...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Rungamatee Tea and Industries Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-08-1991
Reported in: [1993]199ITR282(Cal)
Ajit K. Sengupta, J.1. In this reference under Section 256(1) of the Income tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 1977-78, 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 justified in holding that the income from the estate managed and run by the assessee-company with effect from April 1, 1973, by virtue of an agreement for sale entered into on November 20, 1973, but executed on August 12, 1976, for the period from January 1, 1976, to August 11, 1976, was not liable to be taxed in the hands of the assessee-company for the assessment year 1977-78 ?2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, on a correct interpretation of Section 60 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the Tribunal was right in applying the provisions of Section 60 of the said Act to the facts of the instant case?'2. The facts relating to this reference are that the assessee entered into an agreement with Messrs...
Bimal Kr. Das and anr. Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-08-1991
Reported in: (1992)1CALLT288(HC)
Suhas Chandra Sen, J.1. No affidavit-in-opposition has been filed in this case. The grievance of the petitioner is that tax under West Bengal Motor Vehicles Tax Act, 1979 has to be paid for the year and also in advance Under Section 4 of the Act. The respondents have no authority to realise tax for more than one year in advance. The respondents however, compelled to pay the tax for the period from 1.12.89 to 30.11.2004 that is to say 15 years in advance. The petitioners have stated that they have paid the amount otherwise they will be liable to penalty. Under these circumstances there will be a writ of Mandamus commanding them to realise tax strictly in accordance with provisions of Sections 3 and 4 of the West Bengal Motor Vehicles Tax Act, 1979 and to refund to vehicle owners sums realised in excess of the rate in Schedule and penalty realised from them.2. The respondents are directed to refund the monies realised by way of tax for the period beyond 1st April, 1992 within a period of...
In Re: Smt. Dalia Ghosh; in Re: Subramanian Rajamani
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-03-1991
Reported in: (1991)2CALLT304(HC),96CWN77
Samir Kumar Mookherjee, J.1. We directed both these revisional applications to be heard together as the point involved in the same, namely, when the question of pecuniary jurisdiction is raised by filing an objection Under Section 15 of the Code of Civil Procedure how should the Court decide the propriety of the valuation made in the plaint by the plaintiff.2. The facts in both the cases in their relevant parts are almost identical. The suits were filed for eviction, inter alia, on the grounds of violation Under Section 108(m), (o) and (p) of the Transfer of Property Act. The plaint included a prayer for relief by way of damages and the valuation of the damages caused by the defendants had been stated as Rs. 28,000/- and Rs. 27,000/- respectively. The averments also in the two plaints were more or less identical. In both the plaints, details about the composition of the sums of Rs. 28,000/- and Rs. 27,000/- respectively are absent and on the basis of such absence it has been urged on b...
Commissioner of Wealth-tax Vs. Smt. Manorama Devi Birla
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-02-1991
Reported in: [1993]199ITR250(Cal)
Ajit K. Sengupta, J.1. In this reference under Section 27(3) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, the following questions of law have been referred to this court for the assessment year 1981-82:' 1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in directing the Assessing Officer to value the unquoted shares by applying the yield method 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in rejecting the valuation of the coffee estate made by the Wealth-tax Officer on the basis of the Board's Circular No. 357 dated March 26, 1983 (see [1983] 143 ITR 4)? 3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in directing the Assessing Officer to accept the valuation of shares of the assessee in the coffee estate as shown by the assessee on the basis of the report of a registered valuer?' 2. The facts relating to the first question are that the assessee had shares of t...
The Collector, Land Acquisition, Darjeeling Vs. Sudhangsu Sil and Othe ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-01-1991
Reported in: AIR1992Cal246
ORDERS.P. Rajkhowa, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 31st July, 1987 passed by the learned District Judge, Darjeeling in Misc. Judicial (Land Acquisition) Case No. 11 of 1977.2. This case relates to acquisition of land with building and garden known as 'Sailabhas' at Kalimpong for accommodation of Civil and Criminal Courts at Kalimpong and Soil Testing Laboratory of the Agricultural Department under L.A. Case No. 3/5 of 1976-77. The total area of the land is 2.115 acres comprising homestead, garden, sukha, bamboo and road classes of land recorded in the settlement record of Mouza Kalimpong town, J.L. No. 56, P. S. Kalimpong, District Darjeeling, covered by C.S. Plot Nos. 7901, 7902, 7903, 7904, 7905, 7906 and 7907. The property has been acquired by Notification No. 26056-L.A. dt. 24-10-75 published in the Calcutta Extra Ordinary Gazette of the same date and Declaration No. 21552-L.A. dt. 23-12-76 published in Calcutta Extra Ordinary Gazette dt. 24-12-7...
Jagannath Das Vs. the State
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-01-1991
Reported in: (1992)2CALLT411(HC),95CWN1163
Mukul Gopal Mukherji, J.1. We have exhaustively dealt with the facts of the present case in our judgment dt. 17.7.89 which may be treated as a part of the present judgment too. The appellant was found guilty by the trial court on the basis of circumstantial evidence that the appellant killed his wife Pratima even though the motive for the murder was not clinched. It came out in the evidence not only in the first information report but also from the testimony of several witnesses that the appellant suffered from leprosy and was also suffering from insanity for sometime past. The appellant while passing through the road talked aimlessly to the passers-by and sometime rushed out to beat them. The appellant had no means to maintain his wife and children and did not have any landed property either. The victim, Pratima used to live at the house of her father with the children but some-time she used to come to the house of the appellant with the children. 7/8 days prior to the incident the ap...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›