Kolkata Court July 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.
Fatama Matul Bibi and anr. Vs. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-19-2001
Reported in: 2003ACJ365
Samaresh Banerjea and Pranab Kumar Chattopadhyay, JJ.1. In both the appeals a common question of law as well as fact having been involved, with the consent of the parties these two appeals have been heard analogously and will be governed by the same judgment.2. An appeal being P.M.A. No. 76 of 2001 has been preferred by the claimants against the judgment and award dated 11.9.2000 passed by the learned Judge, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Alipore, South 24-Parganas, in M.A.C. Case No. 482 of 1999 allowing the application under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and awarding a compensation for a sum of Rs. 60,000 only.3. The victim in this case was a child aged about 12 years and was a student of class III. The appeal has been filed by the claimants for enhancement of the amount of compensation.4. Another appeal being P.M.A. No. 1633 of 2000 has also been filed by the claimant for enhancement of the amount of compensation. In the instant case, the victim was a child aged abou...
Workmen represented by West Bengal Medical and Sales Representatives' ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-18-2001
Reported in: [2002(92)FLR78],(2002)IVLLJ859Cal
D.K. Seth, J.1. On July 15, 1998, an award was passed by the learned Tribunal in Reference Case No. VIII-107 of 1991. By means of this writ petition the petitioners have claimed that the respondent-authority should comply with the said award. It is also contended that the said award has not been challenged and has become final.2. Mr. Dasan, learned counsel for the petitioners, contended that this is a case where Section 33-C(2) is not necessary to be invoked since the Tribunal has already ascertained the amount payable.3. In the said award, the Tribunal had observed as follows:'In view of the above findings and on the basis of the evidence on record it is held that the management of IDPL has failed to prove that there was sufficient reason for declaring lock-out of their regional sales office at Calcutta from August 20, 1989 to November 19, 1989. On the other hand, the union has proved through the W.W.-l that the lock-out was declared only and there was no incident in between August 1,...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Kanta Devi Saraf
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-17-2001
Reported in: [2002]254ITR317(Cal)
1. On an application under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the Tribunal has referred the following questions for our opinion :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in holding that for the purpose of getting exemption under Section 54F there was no requirement that the sale price should be actually invested in the house property and that it was sufficient if the legal title to the property vests with the assessee ? 2. Whether the Tribunal was right in holding that notwithstanding the fact that the sale price of the shares was not actually invested in the house property, the assessee would got exemption under Section 54F since the house property was registered in her name within two years from the date of the sale of the shares ? 3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and on a proper interpretation of Section 54F, the Tribunal was right in law in upholding the assessee's claim to relief under Sectio...
Cit Vs. Smt. Kanta Devi Saraf
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-17-2001
Reported in: (2002)172CTR(Cal)322
ORDERBy The CourtOn an application under section 256(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the Tribunal has referred the following questions for our opinion :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in holding that for the purpose of getting exemption under section 54F there was no requirement that the sale price should be actually invested in the house property and that it was sufficient if the legal title to the property vests with the assessee ?2. Whether the Tribunal was right in holding that notwithstanding the fact that the sale price of the shares was not actually invested in the house property, the assessee would get exemption under section 54F since the house property was registered in her name within two years from the date of the sale of the shares?3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and on a proper interpretation of section 54F the Tribunal was right in law in upholding the assessee's claim to relief un...
Sri Bajrang Sharma Vs. Ram Krishna Kundu and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-16-2001
Reported in: (2001)3CALLT121(HC)
P.K. Ray, J. 1. The defendant of Money Suit No. 9 of 1992, being the petitioner in this application under section 115 of the Code Civil Procedure has assailed the order dated 12.8.96 passed by the learned Munsif, 1st Court, Bankura in connection with the said money suit, whereby and whereunder the application under section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure filed by the defendant praying for stay of the instant proceeding till the will is probated in the appropriate forum, was rejected only on the ground that two sons of the plaintiff though claimed to be the legal representatives to continue the suit on the basis of the will in view of their status as executors, but they had also the right as legal heirs on the property of the suit on pro rata basis. 2. The petitioner herein has submitted that since all the legal heirs are not parties to the proceeding, and since only the executors under the will have been impleaded as parties to continue the suit, the left out legal heirs may cause p...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Grindlays Bank Plc
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-13-2001
Reported in: [2002]254ITR289(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 Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is correct in law in upholding the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) in respect of disallowance under Section 40A(5) of the Income-tax Act, excluding the proportionate expenses deductible under Section 20(l)(i) of the Income-tax Act ?'2. The assessee is a banking company within the meaning of the Banking Regulation Act and is incorporated under the laws of the United Kingdom. In the return filed on December 31, 1976, the assessee has declared the income of Rs. 12,25,99,190. The assessment year involved is 1976-77. During the course of the assessment, the Assessing Officer noticed that the assessee has paid excess amount to the employees in terms of Section 40A(5). The assessee has in fact claimed the proportionate expenses deductible under Se...
Budhadev Biswas Vs. Dibbo Gopal Ghatak and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-13-2001
Reported in: (2001)3CALLT389(HC)
P.K. Ray, J. 1. In this writ application, originally the petitioner prayed necessary relief restraining the respondents District Inspector of Schools (SE) Siliguri from cancelling the Memo No. 550/SLG dated 22nd January, 1993 whereby present petitioner's service was approved as Assistant Teacher in Science Group with effect from 1st January, 1993, by the District Inspector of School (SE) Siliguri being Annexure 'G' of this writ application and prayed for necessary direction from this Court for release of salary, allowances and service benefits upon approving service with effect from 2nd April, 1984 as organized staff of the School. The writ petitioner prayed the following reliefs in this writ application: (a) a writ mandamus should not be issued commanding or directing the respondents not to withdraw or cancel or revoke the letter of approval of appointment of the petitioner in the post of Assistant Teacher in Science-Math. Group in Debigunj Vivekananda Junior High School, Police Stati...
ito Vs. Titagarh Steels Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-13-2001
Reported in: (2001)73TTJ(Cal)297
ORDERPramod Kumar, A.M.This appeal filed by the revenue, is directed against the order dated 5-1-1994, passed by the learned Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) Range IX, Calcutta, in the matter of penalty under section 221(1) for the financial year 1990-91. Revenue is aggrieved that the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) erred in deleting penalty of Rs. 15,000 charged under section 221 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act).2. First, the relevant material facts. Admittedly, the only lapse on the part of the assessee tax deductor was that he did not take into account the increase in surcharge, effected vide Finance (Second Amendment) Ordinance, 1990 promulgated on 15-10-1990, which resulted in a surcharge on TDS to at the rate of 15 per cent. In the case of companies, as against 8 per cent surcharge in force upto that point of time. The assessees case is that it was simply an inadvertent error on the part of the assessee which was solely attributable to the fact that the...
Cit Vs. Grindlays Bank Plc
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-13-2001
Reported in: (2002)172CTR(Cal)264
ORDERBy the CourtOn an application under section 256(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the Tribunal has referred the following question for our opinion :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Honble Tribunal is -correct in law in upholding the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) in respect of disallowance under section 40A(5) of the Income Tax Act, excluding the proportionate expenses deductible under section 20(1)(i) of the Income Tax Act.'2. The assessee is a banking company within the meaning of Banking Regulation Act and is incorporated under the laws of United Kingdom. In the return filed on 31-12-1976, assessee has declared the income of Rs. 12,25,99,190. The assessment year involved is 1976-77. During the course of assessment assessing officer noticed that assessee has paid excess amount to employees in terms of section 40A(5). Assessee has in fact claimed the proportionate expenses deductible under section 20(1)(i) of the Act in computing the income u...
M.M. Exports and anr. Vs. Zonal Director General of Foreign Trade and ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-12-2001
Reported in: (2001)3CALLT12(HC),2001(78)ECC705,2001(133)ELT558(Cal)
Y.R. Meena, J. 1. These two cross appeals are directed against the impugned judgment dated 8th December, 2000 of learned single Judge. 2. The petitioner No. 1 is a Registered Partnership Firm and Petitioner No. 2 is one of the partners in that firm. 3. Petitioner No. 1 carries on business of export and import. The main business of petitioner is to export silk fabric and finished glass beads.4. The Government of India published an Export and Import Policy for the years 1997-2002. The scheme called Duty Exemption Scheme. In that scheme on export the exporter gets duty free licence for import of goods i.e. called Duty Entitlement Pass Book (DEPB). The duty credit under the scheme is calculated on the basis of the value of the goods exported. The exporter is eligible to claim the duty free Import goods at a specified percentage of value of export made by the exporter. The import licence that is DEPB is valid for a period of 12 months from the date of issuance of that import licence. The DE...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »