Kolkata Court August 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. Dunlop India Limited
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-20-1993
Reported in: [1994]209ITR221(Cal)
Shyamal Kumar Sen, J.1. The question for determination pursuantto direction passed by this court under Section 256(2) of the Income-taxAct, 1961, is as follows :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the conditions laid down under Section 36 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, were satisfied with regard to the debt of Rs. 1.21 crores and in that view of the matter directing the Income-tax Officer to allow deduction of Rs. 1.21 crores as bad debts?'2. The facts, inter alia, leading to this reference as appearing from the statement of case are that the assessee is a limited company deriving income from business in the manufacture of tyres, tubes, etc. Between November, 1976, and September, 1977, the assessee exported goods to several parties in Turkey amounting in all to Rs. 2,72,19,587. The Central Bank of Turkey, however, did not transfer the amount deposited by the purchasers in Turkey to India. In view of the ...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Poddar Project Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-20-1993
Reported in: [1994]209ITR385(Cal)
Ajit K. Sengupta, J.1. In this reference under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, at the instance of the Revenue, the Tribunal has referred the following question for the opinion of this court :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that resort to Section 154 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, cannot be taken to rectify the original assessments for allowance of municipal tax which was a mistake apparent from the record?'2. The assessee-company is assessed to income-tax under the heads 'Income from house property' and 'Income from other sources'. This reference relates to the income-tax assessment of the assessee-company for the assessment years 1978-79 and 1979-80. In respect of those two years, the assessee-company was originally allowed deduction in respect of municipal taxes in computing its income under the head 'Income from house property' in the sums of Rs. 4,11,352 and Rs. 4,16,337, respectively. Subsequently, the In...
Commissioner of Wealth-tax Vs. Smt. Aruna Paul
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-20-1993
Reported in: [1994]209ITR405(Cal)
Ajit K. Sengupta, J. 1. In this reference under Section 27(1) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, the following questions of law have been referred to this court for the assessment years 1975-76, 1976-77 and 1977-78 :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in directing to take the value of jewellery as on March 31, 1975, March 31, 1976, and March 31, 1977, at Rs. 68,827, Rs. 68,827 and Rs. 76,000, respectively, when the assessee herself disclosed the value of jewellery at Rs. 1,83,000 as on March 31, 1974 ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in relying on the valuation report filed by the assessee for determining the value of jewellery when such appeal by the assessee for the assessment years 1973-74 and 1974-75 were rejected itself by the Tribunal in its consolidated order for assessment years 1967-68 to 1974-75 in Wealth-tax Appeals Nos. 1289 to 1295 of 1980 ?' 2. This reference relates...
Merinoply and Chemicals Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-20-1993
Reported in: (1994)122CTR(Cal)262,[1994]209ITR508(Cal)
Ajit Kumar Sengupta, J.1. The two references--one under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, both at the instance of the assessee were heard together as both involve one issue relating to the assessability of transport subsidy received by the assessee from the State Government of Assam during the previous years relevant to the three assessment years 1980-81 to 1982-83.2. In this reference petition filed before the Tribunal on the same issue the assessee sought for reference on five questions, all touching the basic issue as aforesaid. The Tribunal, however, thought fit to refer only the first question presumably considering the other questions subsidiary and mere ramifications of the first question. The assessee, however, obtained a rule from this court directing the Tribunal to prepare a statement of case on one more question correlated with the question granted by the Tribunal in its reference under Section 256(1) of the said Act. In fine, this court is required to answer two ...
Jit Paul (Huf) and ors. Vs. Commissioner of Wealth-tax
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-20-1993
Reported in: [1994]209ITR675(Cal)
Ajit K. Sengupta, J. 1. In this reference under Section 27(1) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, the following questions of law have been referred to this court for the assessment years 1976-77 and 1977-78 : '1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the market value of unquoted shares should be valued only in accordance with Rule 1D of the Wealth-tax Rules, 1957? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the provision for gratuity made by the company was deductible from the assets of the company for computing market value of unquoted shares of the company in accordance with Rule 1D of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 ?' 2. It is not in dispute that the first question is concluded by the decision of this court in CWT v. India Exchange Traders' Association : [1992]197ITR356(Cal) . Accordingly, the first question is answered in the affirmative and against the assessee and in favour ...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Indian Products Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-20-1993
Reported in: [1994]207ITR647(Cal)
Ajit K. Sengupta, J.1. In this reference under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, at the instance of the Revenue, the Tribunal has referred the following questions of law for the opinion of this court for the assessment year 1984-85 :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was correct in law in deleting the disallowance of Rs. 25,000 out of the sum spent on foreign tour of Mrs. M.H. Shah ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was correct in law in observing that the assessee was entitled to relief under Section 35B of the Income-tax Act, 1961, on Rs. 25,000 being the sum spent on the foreign tour of Mrs. M.H. Shah ? 3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and on a proper interpretation of Section 80HHC(1)(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the Appellate Tribunal was correct in law in considering the item of export of goods or merchandise, viz., coffee export, whic...
Subhas Chandra Basu Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-20-1993
Reported in: (1994)1CALLT305(HC),98CWN672
Samaresh Banerjea, J.1. The subject-matter of challenge in the instant writ petition is an order of discharge issued by the Commanding Officer, Workshop Training Institute, Indian Air Force, Tambaram, Madras being Memo No. IA FF(P) 53 discharging the petitioner from service of the Indian Air Force, under Rule 15 (k) of the Indian Force Rules.2. The facts relevant to the present case are as follows :-The petitioner applied for an employment under the Indian Air Force in the category of airmen. Pursuant to the said application the petitioner was called to appear for preliminary screening test which is a written examination and having succeeded in the same he was further called to appear for final selection test which is also written test, which the petitioner also duly qualified. Thereafter, the petitioner was called at an interview by the Squadron Leader and succeeded in the interview. The petitioner was also found medically fit by the Recruiting Medical Officer after thorough medical e...
Tapan Kumar Chandra and ors. Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-19-1993
Reported in: (1994)1CALLT359(HC)
Susanta Chatterji, J.1. In. the present Writ Petition four petitioners who are graduates in law and having been enrolled with Bar Council of West Bengal to practise as Advocates were selected for the post of Assistant Registrars on the Original Side of this Court, and they are now working as such. They have prayed, inter alia :(a) Declaration that the petitioners were entitled to and be given higher initial start in the same manner and mode as had been granted to all recruits for the posts of Clerk of the State/Assistant Registrar on the Original Side of this Hon'ble Court prior to 1st April, 1981.(b) A Writ of and/or Order and/or Direction in the nature of Mandamus do issue commanding the respondents to forthwith grant to the petitioners the higher initial start in the same manner and mode as has been granted to all recruits for the posts of Clerk of the State/Assistant Registrar on the Original Side of this Hon'ble Court prior to 1st April, 1981.(c) A Writ of and/or order or Directio...
Shalimar Paints Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-18-1993
Reported in: 1994(70)ELT567(Cal)
Ruma Pal, J.1. The petitioner manufactures paints, varnishes and otherallied products. Prior to 1986, for the purpose of Central Excise the goodsproduced by the petitioner were classified under Tariff Item No. 14 of the FirstSchedule of the Central Excises & Salt Act, 1944. Tariff Item No. 14 in so far asit is relevant read :'14. Pigments, colours, paints, enamels, varnishes, blacks and cellulose lacquers -II. Varnishes and blacks -(i) Varnishes(ii) Bituminous and Coal-tar blacks ...'2. Subsequent to the introduction of Central Excise Tax Tariff Act, 1985which came into force from 28th February 1986, the petitioner filed classification lists contending that the products manufactured by the petitioner were'cut back bitumen', and as such classifiable under Tariff Heading No. 27.15 ofthe Schedule to the 1985 Act.3. Before the classification list was accepted by the Central ExciseAuthorities, samples were drawn from the petitioner's products. The sampleswere submitted to the Chemical Exami...
Panchra Mayurakshi Cotton Mills Employees Union and ors. Vs. State of ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-16-1993
Reported in: [1994(68)FLR1261],(1994)ILLJ717Cal
ORDERKalyanmoy Ganguli, J.1. In the instant application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners, inter alia, pray for a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to forbear from giving any effect or further effect to the purported notice of lockout issued by the respondent company on August 5, 1992 which is annexure 'I' to the petition and for cancelling, withdrawing and/or rescinding the same.2. The principal challenge in the writ petition initially was that the purported lockout was illegal. During the course of hearing it was submitted by both the parties that the lockout had been lifted in the meantime. In fact, records were produced before this court by both the parties showing that the lockout stood lifted with effect from March 14, 1993. The respondents contended, inter alia, that as the subject matter of the writ petition was no longer in existence on the date of hearing of the writ petition, the substratum of the writ petitioner was gone...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »