Kolkata Court September 1999 Judgments

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Currency Investment Co. Ltd.

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: (2000)158CTR(Cal)361,[2000]241ITR494(Cal)

1. On the reference application under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the Tribunal has referred the following question set out at page 2 of the statement of case for our opinion :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tri-bunalwas justified in law in not confirming the finding of the Commis-sioner of Income-tax (Appeals) that the share loss claimed by the assessee was not genuine ?'2. The assessee is an investment company. It claimed loss amounting to Rs. 48,390 incurred in the course of dealing in shares during the accounting period. The assessee purchased 3,000 shares of Gwalior Rayon Silk Mfg. Ltd. on November 16, 1981, as per contract note filed from the broker, Ram Narayan Kayan and Co. The sales of those shares were made through D. B. and Co. and the shares were sold on October 22, 1982, as per contract notes filed. The shares were delivered on November 9, 1982. The assessee-company produced the broker Ram Narayan Kayan with its books of acco...

Shambu Gowala Alias Jadav Vs. State of W.B.

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: 2000CriLJ1602

Gitesh Ranjan Bhattacharjee, J.1. Both the Death Reference and the Appeal are being dealt with and disposed of by this judgment as they arise out of the same judgment of the trial Court, namely, Sessions Judge, Cooch Behar passed in Sessions Case No. 79/94. The learned Sessions Judge has by his impugned judgment and order convicted the appellant-accused Sambhu Goala alias Yadav under Section 302, I.P.C. and has sentenced him to death. He has also convicted the accused under Section 201, I.P.C. and has sentenced him to R.I. for seven years for such conviction. It may be mentioned here that the present appellant Sambhu and his mother Sita Goala were tried in the same trial. While the accused Sambhu was charged under Section 498-A, 302/34 and 201/34, I.P.C. his mother, the co-accused was charged under Section 498-A, I.P.C. only. The learned Trial Judge, however, acquitted both the accused persons in respect of the charge framed against them under Section 498-A, I.P.C. But as stated above ...

Sri Kedar Mistry Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Kolkata

1. Applicant, Shri Kedar Mistry, now removed from the service has filed this application challenging the charge-sheet dated 29.10.90, Annexure/D to the application as well as the enquiry report and order of punishment removing him from service by a letter dated 19.4.91 issued by the Divisional Safety Officer, Malda and the order of the appellate authority and the orderof the revisional authority on the ground that he was denied reasonable opportunity to defend his case and also as the findings of the appellate authority and the revisional authority are not based on records that thereby perverse, arbitrary and illegal. The brief fact of the case is that while on duty as Cabinman at West Cabin, Kajra station on 21.9.90 for a period from 17/00 hours to 01/00 hours, applicant after reception of 140 DN on main line at 17/55 hrs. allowed reversal of train engine of 5 UP KJ WMT which was standing on loop line by lowering loop shunt signal without taking any advice from duty ASM under exchang...

Hooghly Mills Co. Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata

Reported in: (2000)74ITD309(Kol.)

1. The only issue in this appeal filed by the assessee relates to the question of allowing interest under Section 244A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 in respect of refund arising to theassessee.2. The CIT(A) states in his appellate order that the assessee-company filed its return of income for the assessment year 1994-95 on 30-8-1995 declaring a tolal income of Rs. 75,92,260. The assessee claimed credit for tax deducted at source of Rs. 14,97,362 and self-assessment tax of Rs. 2,50,00,000. The CIT(A) states thereafter that the return was processed under Section 143(l)(a) of the Act and the income disclosed by the assessee was also accepted by the Assessing Officer. The refund was determined by the Assessing Officer at Rs. 2,21,03,624 after allowing credits of the abovementioned two items. However, no interest under Section 244A was allowed by the Assessing Officer on the amount of refund.3. In the first appeal also, the CIT(A) upheld the action of the Assessing Officer in not allowing th...

Nitya Nanda Ghosh and ors. Vs. Smt. Alo Rani Ghosh and ors.

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: AIR1999Cal89

ORDERV.K. Gupta, J. 1. This civil revision under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure is directed against a judgment dated May 28, 1997 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, 1st Court at Alipore whereby the Misc. Appeal filed by the respondents against the order dated June 30, 1992 passed by Sri. S.L. Biswas, learned Assistant District Judge, 9th Court at Alipore was allowed and the aforesaid order dated June 30, 1992 was set aside.2. Petitioners in the present civil revisional application are the plaintiffs in a suit filed in the year 1984. The suit is for partition and relates to the entire assets of the business being carried out under the name and style of 'Dacca Cinema Cabin' at 56, Park Street, Calcutta. In this pending suit the plaintiff-petitioners filed an application under Order 40 Rule 1 (a) of the Code of Civil Procedure for appointment of a Receiver. Vide the order number 66, dated March 29, 1988 the learned Assistant District Judge seized of the aforesaid...