Kolkata Court June 1993 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. Bankam Investment Limited
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-08-1993
Reported in: (1994)121CTR(Cal)122,[1994]208ITR208(Cal)
ORDER--Rural development expenditure--Society approved by State Level Committee and deduction under s. 35CCA granted--Withdrawal of approval on valid grounds.Held :The CIT, on examination of records, found that the approval to the society stood withdrawn before the assessment was made and, accordingly, the assessment made by the ITO by allowing exemption of the donation to the said society was erroneous insofar as it is prejudicial to the interests of the revenue. The assessee obtained benefit to which the assessee was not entitled on the date the assessment was made. Such erroneous assessment can be rectified by the CIT by exercising his power of revision. Even assuming that the approval was withdrawn after the assessment was made, even then an assessee who indulges in making fictitious donations for the purpose of obtaining an illegal benefit by way of tax evasion cannot claim that such exemption should not have been retrospectively withdrawn. The scheme for giving exemption under s....
Universal Petro Chemicals Ltd. Vs. Superintendent, Central Excise
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-08-1993
Reported in: 1994(72)ELT548(Cal)
Ajit K. Sengupta, J.1. On or about 12th June, 1978 the appellant moved a writ application in this Court, inter alia, contending that the letter dated 30th May, 1978 issued by the Superintendent of Central Excise, treating the Transformer oil under Tariff Item No. 8 is wrongful and illegal.2. On the said application Rule Nisi was issued on 12th June, 1978. An interim order was also passed by Sabyasachi Mukherjee, J. (as His Lordships then was). The said order is as follows :-'Let a Rule Nisi be issued in terms of prayers (a), (b), (c) and (d) of petition. Returnable 6 weeks hence. Upon the petitioner depositing with Mr. H.P. Meharia, Advocate of M/s. Meharia & Co., Advocates for the petitioner who is appointed Receiver without security and without remuneration a sum of Rs. 1,50,000/- there will be an interim injunction in terms of prayer (a) of the petition valid for 10 days for the time being with liberty to apply for extension on notice to the other side. Mr. Meharia will hold the sai...
Putul Dutta Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-04-1993
Reported in: (1994)1CALLT116(HC)
Susanta Chatterji, J.1. The present writ petition has been filed praying inter alia :-'(a) Issue a Writ in the nature of Certiorari commanding the respondents to certify and transmit to this Hon'ble Court the records relating to the petitioner so that conscienable justice may be done by quashing the orders dated 20.1.92 and 15.1.92.(b) A writ in the nature of Mandamus commanding the respondents from giving effect to the order dated 20.1.92 and 15.1.92; and(c) A direction upon the respondents to allow the petitioner to join and pay her salary month by month; and(d) A writ in the nature of prohibition forbidding the respondents from giving effect to the orders dated 20.1.92 and 15.1.92; and(e) A Rule Nisi in terms of prayers (a), (b), (c) and (d); and(f) To call for the records of the case and after perusing the same and hearing both the sides to make the Rule absolute; and(g) To pass and ad-interim order of injunction 'restraining the respondents from giving effect to the impugned order...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›