Kolkata Court December 1993 Judgments
Mcleod Russel (India) Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-28-1993
Reported in: (1994)49ITD396(Kol.)
1. 1 to 3. [These paras are not reproduced here as they involve minor issues.] That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and having regard to the provision of Section 80AB of the Income-tax Act, the Learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) erred in directing the Assessing Officer to allow deduction under Section 80HHC before computation of income under Rule 8 of the Income-tax Rules.The assessee exported tea in the accounting year. It was entitled to deduction under Section 80HHC in respect of the export. It also sold in India tea grown and manufactured by it. In the assessment, the ITO first computed the income from business at Rs. 16,31,26,552. As per Rule 8(1) of the Income-tax Rules, only 40 per cent of the income from tea is to be taxed under the Income-tax Act and the balance of 60% is to be treated as agricultural income exempt from income-tax under Section 10(1) of the Income-tax Act. Accordingly, the ITO brought to tax 40% of Rs. 16,31,24,552, Le., Rs. 6,52,5...
Tag this Judgment!Sri Satyendranath Mondal Vs. Hindusthan Petroleum Corporation and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-23-1993
Reported in: (1994)1CALLT184(HC),98CWN841
Arun Kumar Dutta, J.1. The instant Appeal, along with three other Appeals, being F.M.A.T. Nos. 2824, 2879 and 2481 of 1992, are all directed against the judgment and order dated 10.8.92 passed by Susanta Chatterji, J. CO. Nos. 6113 (W) and 7023 (W) of 1988.2. The writ petitioners, Kutubuddin Goldar and Satyendra Nath Mondal, in the aforesaid two writ petitions, had challenged the issuance of the letter of intent dated 19.4.88 by the Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. (hereinafter shortend into Corporation) in favour of the respondent No. 5, Radhakrishna Roy, offering him the Retail Outlet Dealership at Malancha, District 24-Parganas, in terms thereof.3. The aforesaid Corporation had published an advertisement in the Bengali Daily Newspaper Ananda Bazar Patrika on 20-12-85 inviting applications from unemployed Graduates for appointment of a Dealer for Retail Outlet of their product in the area Malancha, District 24-Parganas (North), in terms thereof specifying the eligibility criteria...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Auto Distributors Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-22-1993
Reported in: [1994]210ITR222(Cal)
Ajit K. Sengupta, J.1. In this reference made at the instance of the Revenue, the following questions have been referred by the Tribunal for the opinion of this court under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961:'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that any expenditure incurred in the course of the assessee's business has to be treated as business expenditure and merits deduction ignoring the provisions of Section 37(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which provides that any business expenditure of capital nature is not allowable as a deduction ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in view of the ratio of the decision of the Calcutta High Court in Chloride India Ltd. v. CIT : [1981]130ITR61(Cal) , the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the expenditure of Rs. 6,96,288 incurred for acquiring a right to vacant possession is an allowable business expenditure ?' 2. The facts as ...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Eastern Commercial Enterprises
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-21-1993
Reported in: [1994]210ITR103(Cal)
Ajit K. Sengupta, J.1. In this reference under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the following questions of law have been referred by the Appellate Tribunal for our opinion :'1. Whether the reduction of the gross profit rate from 30% as determined by the Assessing Officer to 7 per cent. by the Tribunal is based on any relevant material and/or otherwise perverse ?2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in not confirming the gross profit rate of 30 per cent. as determined by the Assessing Officer ?'2. The facts as found by the Tribunal are as follows :The assessment year involved is 1986-87. The assessee is carrying on business of oils of various descriptions and grades. On May 5, 1987, in the course of a search in the premises of the assessee certain materials were found which led the Income-tax Officer in the course of the assessment of the assessee for the assessment year 1986-87 to a conclusion that the purchases show...
Tag this Judgment!Air India Vs. R.M. Investment and Trading Co. Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-21-1993
Reported in: (1994)1CALLT453(HC)
Anandamoy Bhattacharjee, C.J.1. These two appeals involve two questions-(1) whether the trial Court could proceed with the hearing of the application for amendment of the plaint and allow amendments thereof in view of the order staying the suit passed by this Court and (2) whether the amendments allowed by the trial Judge are justified on merits. An affirmative answer to both the questions will entail dismissal of the appeal while a negative answer to any of the questions would require us to allow the appeal and to set aside the impugned order allowing amendments.2. The suit giving rise to the impugned order under these two appeals has been filed by the respondent R.M. Investment and Trading Company Private Limited (hereinafter referred to as R.M.I.) against the appellant Boeing Company (hereinafter referred to as Boeing) being Suit No. 363 of 1990 in the Original Side of this Court. There was an agreement, labelled as 'Consultant Service Agreement,' between the appellant Boeing and th...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Santosh Agencies
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-20-1993
Reported in: [1994]210ITR78(Cal)
Ajit K. Sengupta, J.1. In this reference made at the instance of the Revenue, the following question has been referred by the Tribunal for the opinion of this court under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and on a correct interpretation of Sections 37(3A) and 37(3B) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the expenses incurred on special discount and foreign tour expenses are not hit by the said Sections 37(3A) and 37(3B) of the said Act and thereby directing to delete the consequential addition made in the assessment ?'2. The assessee is engaged in carrying on the business of dealers of Beltek T. v. This reference relates to the income-tax assessment of the assessee for the assessment year 1984-85. In the course of the assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer found that the assessee incurred an expenditure of Rs. 2,16,025 debited under the head 'Special discount' and anoth...
Tag this Judgment!D.C. Dhiman and Bros. (P) Ltd. (In Liqn.) Vs. the Official Liquidator ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-20-1993
Reported in: (1994)1CALLT378(HC)
Samaresh Banerjea, J.1. This application was taken out by Chiranjilal Dhiman and others in the appeal against the order of a learned Judge of this Court taking company matters passed on 18th March, 1993 regarding a sale held by the Court which has been confirmed in favour of the respondent No. 2 at a price of Rs. 7 lakhs in regard to the share of Gurudeb Dhiman and others the heirs of the judgment debtors Meher Chand and Keher Chand Dhiman.2. The petitioners asked for an order before the trial Court inter alia, for setting aside the sale dated 26th February, 1993 in favour of the respondent No. 2 under order 21 Rule 89 of Code of Civil Procedure and a direction upon the Official Liquidator to convey the half share of the premises Nos. 113 and 115 Benaras Road, Howrah in favour of the applicants and also for an order staying further proceedings in execution of the misfeasance decree until further order of the Court.3. By an order dated 27th March, 1992 passed by a learned single Judge o...
Tag this Judgment!Videsh Sanchar Nigam Limited Vs. Dipali Bandopadhyay
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-16-1993
Reported in: (1994)2CALLT377(HC)
Bhagabati Prosad Banerjee, J.1. This appeal is against the judgement and order dated 24th September, 1992 passed by the learned trial Judge by which the learned trial Judge on the basis of a letter written by the writ petitioner-opposite party addressed to the learned Chief Justice of the court dated 29th April, 1992 granted relief to the opposite party. Kumari Dipali Bnadapadhyay instead of filing a formal writ application wrote a letter to the learned Chief Justice of the Court praying for relief against the alleged illegal termination of her service as a Hindi Typist in Videsh Sanchar Nigam Limited (referred to as V.S.N.L.) and that the said letter written by the petitioner-opposite party was specially assigned by the learned Chief Justice Shri N. P. Singh (As His Lordship then was) whereupon the learned trial Judge treated the said letter as a writ application and called upon the appellant to show-cause. The appellant also filed an affidavit-in-opposition dealing with the case made...
Tag this Judgment!Sri Mahadev Ch. Mazumder Vs. the State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-16-1993
Reported in: (1995)1CALLT367(HC)
Shyamal Kumar Sen, J.1. The facts inter alia leading to this Writ petition is that the petitioner was and still is carrying on a proprietorship business under the name and style of M/s. Baghbazar Grinding Mill at No. 2, Chitpur Bridge Approach Road, Calcutta-700 003 for last 20 years without having any complaint with regard to the nature of business. The petitioner being proprietor running the said grinding mill for the purpose of grinding different stone materials, viz. lime stoe, china clay, lump stone, damaged/stoned cement etc. The petitioner at all material times was holding appropriate trade licence. He is a bona fide income tax assessee and professional tax payee. 2. The petitioner usually purchase damaged /stoned cement from Cement Corporation of India Limited (a Government of India Enterprise). Under the contract between the petitioner's concern and Cement Corporation of India Limited, the petitioner cannot use the said cement for the purpose of construction and for resale. Th...
Tag this Judgment!Sri Mahadev Ch. Mazumder Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-16-1993
Reported in: 1994CriLJ3808
ORDERShyamal Kumar Sen, J.1. The facts inter alia leading to this Writ petition is that the petitioner was and still is carrying on a proprietorship business under the name and style of M/s. Baghbazar Grinding Mill at No. 2, Chitpur Bridge Approach Road, Calcutta-700 003 for last 20 years without having any complaint with regard to the nature of business. The petitioner being proprietor running the said grinding mill for the purpose of grinding different stone materials, viz. lime stone, china clay, lump stone, damaged/stoned cement etc. The petitioner at all material times was holding appropriate trade licence. He is a bona fide Income-tax assessee and professional tax payee.2. The petitioner usually purchases damaged/stoned cement from Cement Corporation of India Limited (a Government of India Enterprise). Under the contract between the petitioner's concern and Cement Corporation of India Limited, the petitioner cannot use the said cement for the purpose of construction and for resal...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »