Kolkata Court May 1992 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.
In Re: Mrs. Mira Roy
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-13-1992
Reported in: (1992)2CALLT182(HC),96CWN1082
1. This revisional proceeding raises a question of first impression.2. One Smt. Giribala Devi died testate, leaving a will whereby she had nominated her grandson, Sri Hirak Roy, as the sole executor. On or about 3.11.83 the said executor applied for probate, giving rise to the instant probate proceeding, before the learned District Delegate, 24-Parganas. It is unfortunate that the said probate proceeding remained pending only for the purpose of valuation report of the Collector for more than 8 years. During the pendency of the said proceeding there were various litigations, going upto the Hon'ble Supreme Court, as off shoots of the said probate proceeding. The Hon'ble Supreme Court, however, by its order dated 18.11.91 issued a mandate for disposing of the probate proceeding within a period of two months. The learned District Delegate fixed up the hearing of the probate matter on 3.1.92, when two applications were filed before him-one by the executor praying for leave to amend the prob...
Asst. Collr. of Cus. Vs. Rodolfo J. Cardiente Alias Rudy
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-13-1992
Reported in: 1995(77)ELT865(Cal)
Pabitra Kumar Banerjee, J.1. On 29th September, 1980, in the morning, pursuant to some source of information, a team of 15 Customs Officers led by the Superintendents. D. Singh and L.N. Muzumdar, boarded the vessel Murray Everett of Messrs. Everett Orient Lines (shortly the vessel) lying at Netaji Subhash Dock Calcutta and conducted search in presence of the Chief Steward Mr. Rodolfo T. Cardiente alias Rudy (Rudy in short), accused since acquitted and during search cigarette cartons and large quantities of Wrist Watches, coiled Filaments. Bulb Filaments etc... all of foreign origin valued at more than Rs. 25 lakhs, wrapped up in 35 packets were recovered underneath the baskets of eggs and apples concealed inside the vegetable room of the cold storage of the vessel. All the articles thus recovered were seized under a seizure list exhibit-I prepared in presence of the accused and some witnesses. On the same date and on some other dates subsequent thereto, Rudy made certain statements giv...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. off Shore India Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-12-1992
Reported in: [1994]209ITR473(Cal)
Shyamal Kumar Sen, J.1. On an application under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the following questions have been referred to this court for determination :'(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the finding of the Tribunal that the assessee had bona fide reasons to believe that it had no taxable income and as such it was not liable to file an estimate of advance tax under Section 209A(1)(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, is based on any relevant material or perverse ? (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in cancelling the penalty imposed under Section 273(2)(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?' 2. The facts, inter alia, as appear from the statement of case are that the assessee filed its return of income for the assessment year 1979-80 disclosing nil income after adjustment of business loss of the year and after taking into account the deduction admissible under Section 80M of the Income-tax A...
Pieco Electronics and Electricals Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-12-1992
Reported in: [1994]205ITR469(Cal)
Shyamal Kumar Sen, J.1. Pursuant to the direction of this court under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the following questions were referred by the Tribunal :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that a plain and bare reading of item No. 12 of the Eleventh Schedule shows that electric bulbs and fittings are covered by the said item and that there cannot conceivably be two opinions in the matter ?2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that machinery used for manufacture of electric bulbs and fittings is not entitled to investment allowance under Section 32A of the Act ?3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that grant of investment allowance in the original assessment in respect of machinery used for manufacture of electric bulbs and fittings was a mistake apparent from the records which could be rectif...
income-tax Officer Vs. Marshall Sons and Co. (i) Ltd.
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Decided on: May-11-1992
Reported in: (1992)42ITD496(Kol.)
1. These appeals are filed by the ITO against the order of the CIT (Appeals) cancelling the order passed under Section 201 (1A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 charging interest.2. The brief facts relating to these appeals are that the assessee company having deducted tax at source from salaries of its employees failed to pay the same to the credit of the Central Government as required under Section 200 read with rule 30 of the Income-tax Rules.The reason given by the assessee company to the Assessing Officer was that it faced stringent financial problems on account of several reasons which were beyond its control. The ITO treated the assessee company as in default and charged interest under Section 2O1(1A) amounting to Rs. 9,00,253. Being aggrieved against the order passed by the ITO under Section 201( 1A) the assessee company preferred appeals before the C1T (Appeals) who deleted the interest on the ground that since the proceedings for recovery of tax deducted at source were barred by ...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Tribeni Tissues Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-11-1992
Reported in: [1996]217ITR846(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, the Tribunal was right in holding that the assessee was entitled to weighted deduction under Section 35B(1)(b)(iv) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, in allowing relief of Rs. 58,281 to the assessee ?'The facts leading to this reference briefly stated are that the assessee is a company and the assessment year involved is 1981-82. The assesseeclaimed deduction under Section 35B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for brevity 'the Act'), on account of travelling expenses and commission paid to foreign agents for securing information about the market conditions prevailing abroad. The reason for rejecting the assessee's claim was that item (ii) of Clause (b) of Sub-section (1) of Section 35B of the Act has been withdrawn with effect from April 1, 1981.2. The ...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Park Hotel Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-11-1992
Reported in: (1993)111CTR(Cal)275
AJIT K. SENGUPTA, J. :This reference under s. 256(1) of the IT Act, 1961 relates to the asst. yr. 1979-80. The facts relating to this reference are that the assessee-company was the owner of a leasehold right in the premises at Park Street, Calcutta. In the previous year relevant to the asst. yr. 1971-72, the assessee-company parted with its lease-hold right in a portion of the said premises in favour of M/s. Surendra Overseas Ltd. for a sum of Rs. 63,13,000 for which no registered deed of conveyance was executed. The income from the said lease-hold right was assessed by the ITO in the instant assessment year under the head income from house property. This was challenged in appeal before the CIT(A) following earlier order on this issue in his order dt. 13th December, 1982 directed the ITO to assess the income under the head business. The ITO passed the assessment order giving effect to the direction of the CIT(A) on 21st February, 1983.2. Being aggrieved, the assessee again preferred a...
The Union of India (Uoi) Vs. Lalit Kumar Mukherjee and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-06-1992
Reported in: (1992)2CALLT213(HC)
Sunil Kumar Guin, J.1. A firm land measuring about 12 bighas 10 kattas and 4 chhataks with a garden house known as 'Aloka' thereon and a tank measuring about 1 bigha 15 kattas and 15 chhataks comprised in C.S. plots No. 269, 270 and 276 to 282 of mouja Jungalpur belonged to Marina Debi, the predecessors-in-interest of the Referring Claimants. The said properties were requisitioned by the Government on 19.12.41 under the provision of Rule 75A(1) of the Defence of India Rules. A recurring monthly compensation was assessed for the said properties at Rs. 700/- which was agreed to by the owner. Subsequently the said properties were acquired by the Government on 5.4.46 under the provision of Rule 75A(2) of the' said Rules. The collector assessed the compensation for the acquired properties By adopting two methods, namely, Rental Method and Land and Building Method. After taking the average of the two, he assessed the compensation for the acquired properties at Rs. 1,68,630/-. Malina Debi die...
Babu Seikh Vs. Setbala Mondal and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-04-1992
Reported in: (1992)2CALLT264(HC)
Paritosh Kumar Mukherjee, J.1. This revisional a application is directed against an appellate judgment and order dated 13th June, 1991, passed by the Additional District Judge, 4th Court, Murshidabad, being Misc. Appeal No. 5 of 1991 (Goutam Chandra Mondal v. Babu Sk.). In the said order the Court of Appeal below had allowed the appeal preferred by the plaintiffs-appellants-opposite parties herein and granted injunction restraining the defendants-opposite parties by an order of temporary injunction from disturbing the peaceful possession of the plaintiffs on the suit property.2. The facts stated in this revisional application are as follows :A suit was instituted by the plaintiffs-opposite parties herein, before the learned Munsif, Lalbagh being Title Suit No. 113 of 1990 and in connection with the said suit a prayer for interim injunction was made under Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The learned Munsif, Lalbagh had taken up the injunction matter and had taken into...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›