Kolkata Court March 2001 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. Emerald Commercial Ltd. and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-23-2001
Reported in: (2001)171CTR(Cal)193,[2001]250ITR539(Cal)
1. On an application under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, this court has directed the Tribunal to refer the following common questions in the case of both the assessees :'1. Whether, the finding of the Tribunal that the loss incurred by the assessee in share dealings is genuine and accordingly allowing the loss is based on any evidence or based on ignoring the relevant material or relying on irrelevant material and whether such finding is otherwise unreasonable and perverse ?2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the losses incurred in share dealings disallowed by the Income-tax Officer confirmed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) are based on presumption and are not warranted by facts and evidence on record ?'2. In pursuance of our direction the Tribunal has referred the abovesaid questions for our opinion. The assessees during the assessment year 1985-86 suffered loss of Rs. 1,31,735 and R...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Avik Investment and Trading Co. (P.) Lt ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-23-2001
Reported in: [2001]250ITR854(Cal)
1. On an application under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, this court has directed the Tribunal to refer the following question set out at page 2 of the paper book for the opinion of this court :'Whether, on the facts of the case though the assessee was only a partner of a firm to which the dividend arose on the shares held by the firm, the Tribunal was correct in law in holding that the assessee (a partner) would be entitled to deduction under Section 80M of the Income-tax Act, 1961, on account of share income by way of dividend from the firm?'2. In pursuance of our direction, the Tribunal has referred the question for our opinion.3. The assessee is a private limited company and is one of the partners in a firm, Kusum Investment and Finance Corporation. The firm had at different times purchased shares of different companies and those shares stood registered in the names of the different partners. Since the firm is not entitled under the law to get the shares registered in ...
Jyoti Priya Mallick and ors. Vs. State of W.B. and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-23-2001
Reported in: 2001CriLJ3101
Ashok Kumar Mathur, C.J.1. By this public interest litigation the petitioner has prayed that the respondent Nos. 1 to 10 be directed to act in accordance with law and in accordance with Section 23 of the Police Act identifying the miscreants who resorted to wide spread violence on 2nd July, 2000 at Bidhan Nagar, Saltlake, by identifying them from the news reports and picture from the television reports, arresting them and bring ing them to book. It is also prayed that the respondents Nos. 1 and 10 be commanded by a writ in the nature of Mandamus not to give any election duty in future to the respondents Nos. 3 to 9.2. The brief facts which are necessary for disposal of this public interest litigation are that 25th June, 2000 was the date fixed for municipal election for the Bidhan Nagar Municipality and the respondents Nos. 3 to 9 were deputed to see that the civic poll in Saltlake is held peacefully. On the day of of the poll severe violence took place all around Saltlake and the resp...
Mihijam Vanaspati Ltd. Vs. Commercial Tax Officer, Asansol Charge and ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-20-2001
Reported in: [2001]123STC583(Cal)
1. By the present writ application, the writ petitioner challenged an order dated March 18, 1999 passed by the Taxation Tribunal and the orders dated September 13, 1995, April 7, 1996 and January 15, 1998 passed by the respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3 respectively, viz., the Commercial Tax Officer, Asansol Charge, District Burdwan, Assistant Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, Asansol Circle, Burdwan and the Deputy Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, Asansol Circle, Burdwan. By the impugned order, the Tribunal had set aside the order in revision dated February 19, 1996 passed by the respondent No. 2 who observed in his order in the revision case filed before him that the vehicle was inspected at the place on the road linking Chittaranjan and Asansol and also the roads leading to Ranchi and it was found that Section 68 of the 1994 Act was contravened. Against this order, the writ petitioner filed a further revision petition before the Deputy Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, Asansol Circle who confirme...
Shriram City Union Finance Ltd. Vs. Haji Abdul Samad
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-16-2001
Reported in: (2001)2CALLT290(HC)
A. Kabir, J. 1. This appeal is directed against Order No. 3 dated 22nd September, 2000 passed by the learned Acting Chief Judge, City Civil Court, at Calcutta, in Misc. Case No. 5057 of 2000, fixing a date for hearing of the application filed by the respondent herein under section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 and staying the operation of the Award dated 7th July, 2000, till the said date.2. As will appear from the order-sheet of the said Misc. Case, the same was started on an application made by the respondent herein under section 34 of the aforesaid Act. Subsequently, the said respondent as the petitioner in the said Misc. Case filed another application under section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Since a Caveat had been lodged, a direction was given for service of the application on the Caveator.3. On 22nd September, 2000, the application under section 9 was taken up for consideration and the order, as indicated hereinabove, was passed.4. Challeng...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Shambhu Investment Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-16-2001
Reported in: (2001)168CTR(Cal)237,[2001]249ITR47(Cal)
Ashim Kumar Banerjee , J.1. In compliance with the direction of this court under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the following question has been referred by the Tribunal for our consideration :'(a) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the finding of the Tribunal that there was no relationship of landlord and tenant between the assessee and the persons who hired the office accommodation from the assessee is based on any relevant evidence or authority?(b) Whether, the finding of the Tribunal that considering the services and facilities offered by the assessee to the hirers of the office space the income should be assessed as business income is based on any relevant evidence or arbitrary ?(c) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the assessment made by the Income-tax Officer was not erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue and thereby cancelling the order under Secti...
DolphIn Laboratories Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-16-2001
Reported in: (2001)168CTR(Cal)652,[2001]249ITR538(Cal)
1. On an application under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the Tribunal has referred the following question for our opinion :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the expenditure incurred by the assessee on free samples and technical literature was hit by the provisions of Section 37(3A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?'2. The assessee is a manufacturer and seller of drugs and pharmaceutical products. The assessment year involved is 1985-86 for which the accounting year ended on June 30, 1984. During the previous year, the assessee has incurred expenditure on technical literature and samples and claimed an amount on that expenditure to the tune of Rs. 9,29,545 on literature and Rs. 12,41,343 on samples. The Income-tax Officer has applied the provisions of Section 37(3A) of the Act of 1961, and disallowed part of the expenditure claimed by the assessee, by applying the provision of Subsection (3A) of Section 37 of the Act of 1961.3. At the outset learned ...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. India Automobiles (1960) Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-16-2001
Reported in: [2001]251ITR117(Cal)
1. On a reference application under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the Tribunal has referred the following questions set out in paragraph 6, at page 7 of the statement of case :'I. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the amount of Rs. 6,39,971 can be assessed to tax as income ?2. If the answer is in the affirmative, can it be brought to tax as income under the head 'Other sources' ?'2. The assessee owns house property at No. 9, Old Post Office Street, Calcutta. The house property income was assessed under the head 'House property'.3. In the earlier years, the assessee was liable to pay corporation tax to the tune of Rs. 11,01,189 and on that basis the liability was allowed, though the assessee has challenged that levy on tax. During the assessment year in question, the liability was settled at Rs. 4,37,898 and the assessee got the relief of Rs. 6,75,191. The Income-tax Officer while completing the assessment took the view that the balance amount, i....
Bibhas Chandra Manna Vs. State Transport Authority and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-16-2001
Reported in: AIR2001Cal132
Ashok Kumar Mathur, C.J. 1. This is an appeal directed against the order passed by the Learned Single Judge dated 21st November, 2000 whereby the learned single Judge has dismissed the writ petition.Aggrieved against this order the present appeal has been filed by the petitioner/ appellant.2. The brief facts are that the petitioner is the holder of a permanent stage carriage permit for the route from Howrah to Digha. He has challenged the temporary grant of permit in favour of respondent No.8 from Kasbagoia to Calcutta/Howrah. The petitioner was operating on this route since long and his permit was valid upto 9th August, 2000. It was alleged that he was operating on this route for the last 16 years. Thereafter a scheme was notified by the Government of West Bengal on 15th September, 1988 in pursuance of Section 68D(3) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 now under Section 100(3) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as the Act of 1939 and 1988). The scheme related to nati...
Sankari Sarkar Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-16-2001
Reported in: [2001(91)FLR1148],(2002)ILLJ634Cal
Hrishikesh Banerji, J.1. This writ application is directed against the Order dated November 7, 2000 of the Calcutta Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal (The Tribunal for short) whereby the petitioner's application, challenging her transfer from Calcutta to Port Blair, has been dismissed by the Tribunal.2. The petitioner was appointed as a skilled daily rated Mazdoor under the Electricity Department (Andaman and Nicobar) by an Office Order dated July 27, 1984 and was working as such in the Office of the Calcutta Sub-Division of Andaman Electricity Department at Calcutta. With effect from September 2, 1985 she was absorbed as a Casual Mazdoor called TSM i.e. Temporary Status Mazdoor. By an office order dated September 30, 1999 (Annexure P-1 to the Petition) the petitioner was transferred to IREP Division, Port Blair.3. The husband of the petitioner is a permanent employee, working as a Peon in the University of Calcutta. The salary drawn by him is not sufficient to maintain thei...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »