Kolkata Court July 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.
Fitwell Fastner (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-15-1993
Reported in: 1993(68)ELT50(Cal)
Ruma Pal, J.1. The petitioners had imported Foley Balloon Catheters. The question which has arisen for determination in this case is whether additional customs duty is payable on Foley Balloon Catheters.2. It is the petitioners' case that such additional duty was not payable. The petitioners' argument is that the goods are not leviable to Excise Duty under the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 and as such no additional duty could be imposed under Section 3 of the Customs Act, 1962.3. The petitioners moved this writ application on 13th May, 1993 upon notice to the respondents. In the writ petition the petitioners have challenged the refusal of the respondent authorities to exempt Foley Balloon Catheters from payment of additional duty. By an interim order I had directed the Assistant Collector of Customs to hear and dispose of the representation of the petitioners by which the petitioners had claimed relief from payment of additional duty. Consequent directions regarding the hearing we...
Gramophone Co. of India Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-13-1993
Reported in: (1994)48ITD145(Kol.)
Where assessment is found erroneous in respect of one of the several issues, it cannot be taken to be erroneous in entirety.For the assessment year 1984-85 the assesseee recording company's assessment was completed under section 143(3). Subsequently, the Commissioner initiated proceedings under section 263 on the grounds of (i) incorrect allowance for certain amount as provision for stock, (ii) incorrect allowance of certain amount under `miscellaneous expenses, (iii) non-inclusion of bonus paid to the assessee's dealers, for the purpose of disallowance under section 37(3A) and (iv) wrong allowance of royalty paid by the assessee. On receiving a detailed reply from the assessee, the Commissioner took the view that the assessment had been completed without any enquiry into the various claims of the assessee, and, therefore, set aside the same with the direction to reframe. On appeal, the assessee, while challenging the Commissioner's order on the last two issues, made no grievance agai...
Smt. Minati Das Vs. Radhakanta Patra and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-12-1993
Reported in: (1994)2CALLT432(HC)
Gitesh Ranjan Bhattacharjee, J.1. In this criminal revision the question that has fallen for consideration is whether any interference with the order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 4th Court, Midnapur refusing to add the opposite party Nos. 1, 2 & 3 as accused in the pending sessions trial, is necessary. In this case charge was framed against the added opposite party Nos. 5 to 27 under Section 302 I.P.C. and examination of as many as four prosecution witnesses including the present petitioner has been completed. At this stage prosecution made an application before the learned Court below for making the opposite party Nos. 1 to 3 accused in the said proceeding under Section 319 Or. P.C. in view of the evidence obtained in the case implicating the said 3 persons who were not charge-sheeted as accused. On consideration of the evidence so far adduced and the statements recorded under Section 161 Cr. P.C. the learned Additional Sessions Judge however did not find it to be a fit c...
India Steel Corporation and ors. Vs. Sri Ahindra Lal Datta and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-12-1993
Reported in: (1993)2CALLT269(HC)
R. Bhattacharyya, J.1. In the aforesaid criminal revision, twin question raises its head for decision passed, in connection with order No. 1 dated 24.3.90, by the learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate for cognizance being taken on the basis of a batch of complaints of the Asstt. Commissioner in Case No. C/770/90.2. Most of the facts are no longer in dispute. The accused persons, as partners, were hauled up for commission of an offence Under Section 276B(ii)/278B of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The non payment of the tax deducted at source laid the seeds of initiation of the criminal proceedings despite the pecuniary obligations discharged by the partners beyond the statutory period.3. The question arises in this way. Mr. Bhattacharyya appearing for the revisionists has canvassed that no penal action lies against the firm as it is not a body corporate nor a juristic person. He has tried to impress on me that the code is meticulously silent about the prosecution of a firm in a criminal tria...
A. Stock and Co. (In Liquidation) and Official Liquidator Vs. Dilip Ku ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-09-1993
Reported in: AIR1994Cal1,[1996]87CompCas139(Cal)
ORDER1. An application under Section 543(1) of the Companies Act, 1956 was filed on 16-9-91 for and on behalf of the Official Liquidator by way of a Judge's Summons which are, inter alia, as follows:'1. Declaration that the Respondents and each of them, who were the Directors of the Company abovenamed at the time of winding up thereof and at all material times have misapplied, misappropriated and/ or retained and/ or become liable and/ or accountable for Rs. 72,87,903.86 p. and/or gulty of misfeasance and breach of trust in relation to the said Company on the following grounds:--(a) The respondents have misappropriated a sum of Rs. 1,11,00,260.18 p. being the money lent and advanced by secured creditors and the said Respondents are bound to restore the sum of Rs. 1,11,00,260.18 p. together with interest thereon at the rate of 18% per annum being the prevailing rate charged by the Nationalised Banks from the date of liquidation until realisation.(b) The Respondents and/ or each of them ...
Khalsa Brothers Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-09-1993
Reported in: [1996]217ITR185(Cal)
Ajit K. Sengupta, J.1. These two references relate to the assessment year 1981-82 for which the relevant accounting year ended on March 31, 1981. The assessee, a registered firm, purchased machinery worth Rs. 16,23,348 for use and claimed investment allowance of Rs. 4,05,812 under Section 32A of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The assessee-firm was engaged in removing overburdens and raising of coal in Rajpura Colliery under the Eastern Coalfields Ltd. It was claimed that the work undertaken by the assessee-firm was a process which was normally carried on by a coal miner engaged in open cast mining and further claimed to be treated as an industrial undertaking eligible for investment allowance under Section 32A of the Act. The assessee also filed a letter of intent dated December 27, 1980, and a certificate dated February 22, 1984, from the agent of Rajpura Colliery. The Income-tax Officer found that the letter of intent indicated that the assessee would be paid at certain rate as hiring cha...
Commissioner of Income-tax and ors. Vs. Graphite India Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-09-1993
Reported in: [1994]209ITR88(Cal)
Mrs. Ruma Pal, J. 1. In this writ application, the petitioner has challenged the three orders by which its claim for payment of interest under Section 214 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') has been rejected. As a consequential relief, the petitioner has claimed payment of interest under Section 214 of the Act.2. The petitioner's accounting year for the relevant period ended on December 31, 1982. On June 14, 1982, the petitioner submitted an estimate of advance tax for the assessment year 1983-84. The estimated tax was paid in three instalments, i.e., June 14, 1982, September 13, 1982 and December 15, 1982. On March 15, 1983, the petitioner submitted a revised estimate and paid a further sum of Rs. 30,00.000 by way of advance tax for the assessment year 1983-84. The returned income of that year was Rs. 30,88,760.3. By an order dated February 28, 1986, the Assessing Officer completed the assessment for the assessment year 1983-84 under Section 143(3) of t...
Shahdara (Delhi) Saharanpur Light Railway Co. Ltd. (In Voluntary Liqui ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-09-1993
Reported in: [1994]208ITR882(Cal)
Ajit Kumar Sengupta, J.1. This reference under Section 256(1) relates to two series of assessment years, one from 1972-73 to 1974-75, and the other from 1976-77 to 1981-82. Thus there are nine assessment years involved and some of the questions raised are common to all the years and some common to some of the years. We have arranged the questions in the following manner :Assessment years : 1972-73 to 1974-75 and 1976-77 to 1981-82 : ' 1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that non-computation of tax in the body of the assessment order under Section 143(3) or 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, did not invalidate the order when the amount of tax was mentioned in the demand notice ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in rejecting the stand of the assessee : (a) That the return of income signed and verified by one of the liquidators was non est in law and the assessment made on that ...
Affai Vs. the State
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-09-1993
Reported in: (1994)1CALLT51(HC)
Arun Kumar Dutta, J.1. This appeal is directed against the Judgment and Order of conviction and sentence passed by the learned Sessions Judge at Port Blair on 17.12.92 in Sessions Case No. 5 of 1991 before him.2. The accused-Appellant Affai had been tried by the learned Sessions Judge for having allegedly committed rape on Kumari Minoti Dhali at Tugapur No. 2, within P.S. Maya Bunder, on the 20th day of August, 1988, punishable under Section 376, I.P.C.3. Shortly put, it is the prosecution case that the P.W. 1 Minoti Dhali, a teacher of Anganwadi at Tugapur, within P.S. Mayabunder, had been returning back home from her school on 10.8.1988 around 1-30 P.M. Geeting down from the bus at Lal Tikri crossing she was proceeding along the Block Road. Reaching near the culvert on the way to her house, she had heard a sound from behind; and turning back could find the accused Affai, a resident of Tugapur No. 1, proceeding towards her along the pathway. She started proceeding ahead, and the accus...
Setrak Vs. the State
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-09-1993
Reported in: (1994)1CALLT206(HC)
Arun Kumar Dutta, J.1. The instant two appeals are directed against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 22nd October, 1983 passed by the learned Sessions Judge at Port Blair in Sessions Case No. 3 of 1982 before him.2. The accused Setrak and Appolous had been tried by the learned Sessions Judge for having allegedly committed murder by causing the death of Hossain Koya in furtherance of their common intention and also trying to cause disappearance of evidence of murder in furtherance of their common intention, thereby committing offences punishable under Section 302/34 and 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code.3. An UD FIR No. 1/81 dated 17.2.81 was lodged by one Alfred, IIIrd Captain of Malacca bustee, reporting therein that one Smti Solamy of Malacca had informed him that when she had gone to the jungle for collection of pan leaves at about 9 A.M. on that day (17.2.81) she had seen a dead body lying near the cave in the jungle She went near the dead body and found it to ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »