Kolkata Court April 1995 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.
income-tax Officer Vs. Laxmi Narayan and Co.
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-28-1995
Reported in: (1995)54ITD671(Kol.)
1. This appeal is instituted by the department against the order of the CIT (Appeals) for the assessment year 1976-77 on the following grounds : 1. That, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) XIV, Calcutta was not justified in holding that the proceedings started under Section 147(a) were not correct and that the same should therefore be null and void and hence Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) XIV erred in cancelling the reassessment made under Section 143(3)/147(a). 2. That, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) XIV, Calcutta erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 1,50,000 made by the Assessing Officer as income from undisclosed sources.2. The appeal is filed late by 12 days. Since the department has filed condonation petition explaining the day to day delay to our satisfaction, the delay is condoned after hearing ld. counsel for the assessee. Accordi...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Octavious Steel and Co. Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-28-1995
Reported in: [1996]221ITR810(Cal)
K.C. Agarwal, C.J.1. This is a reference made at the instance ofthe Commissioner of Income-tax (Central-II), Calcutta, referring the following two questions of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, dated December 3, 1990 ;'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that amount paid in excess of maximum calculated under the provision of Section 36(1)(ii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, on the ground that the amount would be treated as customary bonus and deductible under Section 37(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the cost of stamp paper, registration expense and legal expenses totalling Rs. 1,071 incurred by the assessee as per agreement of lease deed in acquiring the sub-lease right from Sri Mohan Lal Goenka in the property at 11, Dover Park, Calcutta, which was subsequently transferred in favour of the Syndicate Bank for a consid...
Westinghouse Saxby Farmer Ltd. Vs. Raj Behari Ram and ors. and K.B. Da ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-28-1995
Reported in: (1995)2CALLT103(HC),[1995(71)FLR1064],(1996)IIILLJ122Cal,1995(7)SLR281
Samaresh Banerjea, J.1. In both the writ applications being C.O. No. 4046 (W) of 1988 and CO. No. 4047 (W) of 1988 the petitioner company namely, Westinghouse Saxby Farmer Ltd. has challenged the Award dated September 27, 1987 passed by the 9th Industrial Tribunal, jointly in case of X-30/ 82. and X-31/82, which were heard analogously. By the said award it was directed that the dismissal of Shri K. B. Dalrami, workman respondent No. 1 and Shri A. K. Patra, workman respondent No. 2 in C.O. No. 4047 (W) of 1988 and Raj Behari Ram workman respondent No. 1 in C.O. No. 4046 (W) of 1988 are not justified andthey are entitled to get reinstatement in their respective services from the date of their dismissal with all back wages, all allowances and all the benefits which they were entitled to get up to this day if they were in service. As Shri A. K. Patra died sometimes in August, 1984 during the pendency of the proceeding before the Tribunal and was substituted by his widow, it was held that h...
Kenaram Alias Kinuram Majhi Vs. the State
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-28-1995
Reported in: (1995)2CALLT296(HC)
Arun Kumar Dutta, J.1. This Appeal is directed by the accused Kenaram alias Kinuram Majhi (hereinafter referred to as accused) against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 6th July, 1981 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 1st Court, Alipore, 24-Parganas (South), in Sessions Trial No. 1 of May, 1981/Case No. 39 of April, 1981 before him.2. The accused stood charged for an offence punishable under Section 304, Part-I, Indian Penal Code, (hereinafter shortened into I.P.C.) for having allegedly intentionally caused death to his wife Kalbita Majhi '(Naskar) on 18th September, 1979 with the knowledge that his act was likely to cause her death on the allegations made in the F.I.R.3. It is alleged by the prosecution that the deceased Kabita was given in marriage with the accused about two years before her death by her mother Saraswati Naskar. Since the marriage, she used to be continuously tortured by her husband for which a village 'Salish' took place. But des...
Kanai Mistry and ors. Vs. State
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-28-1995
Reported in: 1995CriLJ2615
Arun Kumar Dutta, J.1. This Appeal is directed by the Appellant-accused Kanai Mistry (hereinafter referred to as accused) against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 27th April, 1992 passed by the Learned Additional Sessions Judge, 14th Court, Alipore, in S. T. Case No. 2(4)/91 before him.2. The accused, along with 10 others, stood charged for having allegedly committed offences punishable under Sections 148, 325/149, and 302/ 149, IPC, on the allegations made in the FIR.3. Briefly stated, the prosecution case is that on 15th August, 1987 at about 3.00 p.m. the accused Kanai Mistry, who is a cousin of complainant Ananda Mohan Mistry, along with others, were putting up fencing with thorny branches of trees on the ejmali passage at Kumropara Lot No. 25, Hajrar Gheri, Police Station - Malhurapur, when the complainant, his brothers, parents and their children protested; whereupon a quarrel ensued. The accused persons then started assaulting the complainant party with la...
Ashutosh Chowdhury Vs. State and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-28-1995
Reported in: 1996CriLJ2231
ORDERN.K. Bhattacharya, J.1. By this revision under Sections 397 and 401 read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the petitioners have challenged a proceeding in G.R. Case No. 19 of 1992 arising out of Deganga P.S. Case No. 1 dated 2-1-92 under Section 498A/406/120B of the Indian Penal Code, pending in the Court of the learned Sub-divisional Judicial Magistrate, Barasat, North 24-Paraganas. According to the petitioners, the entire incident happened on and from 8th May, 1985 and continued up to 4th April, 1986 when, according to the wife opposite party No. 2, she was driven out from her matrimonial home. Thereafter, on 2nd July, 1991 the wife opposite party No. 2 filed a petition of complaint alleging torture, both mental and physical, by the accused persons upon her and the said complaint was forwarded to the police by the learned Magistrate in exercise of his power under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The said complaint was treated as an FIR and the ...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Octavious Steel and Co. Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-28-1995
Reported in: (1997)137CTR(Cal)257
K. C. AGARWAL, C.J. :This is a reference made at the instance of the CIT (Central-II), Calcutta, referring the following two questions of the Tribunal, dt., 3rd Dec., 1990 :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that amount paid in excess of maximum calculated under the provisions of s. 36(1)(ii) of the IT Act, 1961, on the ground that the amount would be treated as customary bonus and deductible under s. 37(1) of the IT Act, 1961 ?2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the cost of stamp paper, registration expense and legal expenses totalling Rs. 1,071 incurred by the assessee as per agreement of lease deed in acquiring the sub-lease right from Sri Mohan Lal Goenka in the property at 11, Dover Park, Calcutta, which was subsequently transferred in favour of the Syndicate Bank for a consideration of Rs. 40 lakhs cannot be considered as the cost of acquisition...
Mrs. Malabika Dhar and Others Vs. University of North Bengal and Other ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-27-1995
Reported in: AIR1995Cal303
ORDER1. The three writ petitioners have filed the present writ petition under Art. 226 for quashing the impugned orders bearing Ref. No. SSA/95/10/(41) dated the 15th March, 1995 issued in respect of each of the three petitioners by the respondent No. 6, the Head of the Department of Sociology and Social Anthropology, University of North Bengal by which the petitioners who were already admitted to the M.A. Part-I Class of the said University, have been informed that their admission to the said class has been cancelled by the Executive Council in its meeting held on 13th March, 1995 in view of the gross violation of the prescribed rules for such admission. The petitioners were accordingly instructed therein not to attend theclasses with immediate effect. On receipt of the same the petitioner No. 1 also wrote to the respondent No. 7 on the very next day, that is, on 16th March, 1995 that she did not violate any rule and that she got herself admitted in accordance with the official proced...
C. Kamraj and ors. Vs. the State and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-26-1995
Reported in: (1995)2CALLT173(HC)
Arun Kumar Dutta, J.1. We had heard the submissions of the learned Advocates for the accused-petitioners and the two Opposite-Parties at length yesterday. We have perused the materials on record, as also the decisions-referred to by the Learned Advocates for the contending parties.2. The accused-petitioners have prayed for bail mainly on the ground that the investigation of the relevant case had not been concluded within the prescribed period of 90 days, and that the charge-sheet submitted is not a conclusive one as it is mentioned therein that a supplementary charge-sheet would be submitted in the matter.3. The nature of the case would appear from the order of the court below dated 10.3.94, which we do not propose to re-iterate. It appears from the said order that the accused-petitioners were arrested on 27.11.94 and the charge-sheet in the relevant case was signed by the Investigating officer on 24.2.95, which was filed before the Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate concerned on 27.2.9...
Ram Chandra Singh and anr. Vs. State
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-26-1995
Reported in: 1996CriLJ839
Arun Kumar Dutta, J.1. The instant Appeal was admitted on 30th September, 1980, and the two accused-appellants Ram Chandra Singh and Banowari Lal Yadav had been directed to be released on bail pending hearing of the Appeal; who were accordingly released on bail. The Learned Advocate for the Appellants, Mr. Ramendra Nath Chakrabarty, had been allowed to retire from the case on the prayer made by him in terms of the Court's Order dated 3rd April, 1991. The Court by the said Order had thereupon directed issue of administrative notices upon the Appellants for their appearance before the Court for the purpose of hearing of the Appeal. The record would indicate that the administrative notices issued in terms of the aforesaid order could not be served upon any of the said two Appellants despite repeated directions; and had eventuality been returned unserved with the report that they do not reside in the given address. The sureties for the accused-Appellants could neither furnish their correct...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »