Kolkata Court August 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.
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. United Commercial Bank
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-06-1992
Reported in: [1994]206ITR641(Cal)
Ajit K. Sengupta, J.1. In this reference under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, made at the instance of the Revenue, the following question has been referred by the Tribunal for the opinion of this court:'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that there was no mistake in the Income-tax Officer's order granting relief under Section 91 in respect of Rs. 14,98,034 which could be rectified under Section 154 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?'2. The facts admitted and/or found by the Tribunal are as under :The assessee is a banking company. It held foreign currency balances at its authorised branches. By reason of the devaluation of the Indian rupee on June 6, 1966, a profit of Rs. 1,17,77,286 arose to the assessee-bank. These profits, although initially returned by the asscssee-bank as its income, were later claimed to be exempt as of casual and non-recurring nature within the meaning of Section 10(3) of the said Act. This c...
Jatia Investment Co. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-06-1992
Reported in: [1994]206ITR718(Cal)
Ajit K. Sengupta, J.1. In this reference under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the following questions of law have been referred to this court for the assessment year 1976-77 :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal's findings that the assessee had paid cash for purchase of shares and that it was not able to show how it was provided and that the concern from whom loan was taken did (not) have enough to lend the assessee are perverse and based on no materials and/or were arrived at by ignoring relevant materials ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the finding of the Tribunal that the Income-tax Officer was justified in drawing the conclusion that the assessee brought cash into the books of account for the purchase of shares but the source thereof was unexplained is vitiated being perverse and/or having been arrived at on a consideration of irrelevant materials and/or by ignoring relevant materials ? 3. Whether...
State of West Bengal and ors. Vs. Anil Krishal Paul
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-06-1992
Reported in: [1993]88STC337(Cal)
Ajit Kumar Sengupta, J. 1. This appeal by the State of West Bengal is directed against the order dated 11th June, 1985, of the court of the first instance on the writ petition filed by the respondent challenging the levy and collection on 'gudakhu' or 'gurakhu' under the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941, the West Bengal Sales Tax Act, 1954 and the Taxes on Entry of Goods into Calcutta Metropolitan Area Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as 'the 1941 Act, the 1954 Act and the Entry Tax Act', respectively) and the Rules framed thereunder. The learned Judge following the judgment of a learned single Judge dated 21st September, 1984 in Gulabchand Harekchand v. State of West Bengal (since reported in [1985] 59 STC 224) held that tax cannot be levied on 'gudakhu' as this is covered by the expression 'tobacco' and further 'gudakhu' not being a tooth-paste or tooth-powder is not subject to levy of tax under the West Bengal Sales Tax Act, 1954 or under the Taxes on Entry of Goods into Calcu...
Debabrata Ghosh Vs. Assistant Collector of Customs
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-06-1992
Reported in: 1993(68)ELT551(Cal)
Suhas Chandra Sen, J.1. The petitioner used to stay in the United Kingdom. He purchased a second hand Jaguar car at a price of 1323 at a public auction on 4th August, 1988. The petitioner has described the price of the car as bargain price. The auction receipt for the purchase price of the car was produced before the Customs authorities and has also been annexed to this writ petition. The description of the car has been given as 'second hand Jaguar of 1985 - Model Sovereign 4.2 Auto 4 door Saloon Cylinder, capacity 4235 CC.2. The petitioner has stated in the petition that this car was purchased as a part of his plan to return to India. The petitioner was working in the United Kingdom and he retired in 1991. After retirement he came back to India along with his wife. The petitioner has brought in unaccompanied goods belonging to the petitioner which included the Jaguar car in a container. The case of the petitioner is that the car was purchased for the purpose of bringing it to India. T...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›