Kolkata Court January 2003 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.
Magma Leasing Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-16-2003
Reported in: (2003)180CTR(Cal)513,[2003]260ITR36(Cal)
D.K. Seth, J.1. The appeal was admitted on the following grounds :'(i) Whether on a proper construction of the lease agreement dated January 7, 1983, and Section 24(1)(i)(a) the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that all the responsibilities of repair lay with the tenant or that the assessee had not undertaken to bear the cost of repairs or was not entitled to the deduction under the said provision?(ii) Whether the Tribunal misdirected itself in law in upholding the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax under Section 263 withdrawing the deduction under Section 24(1)(i)(a) of Rs. 15,23,905?'2. The moot question that falls for our consideration is whether, having regard to the terms of the deed of lease, the assessee is entitled to the benefit under Clause (a) or the case falls under Clause (b) of Section 24(1)(i) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Initially, in the earlier order, such benefit was allowed to the assessee under the said provision. But subsequently, in exercise of power...
Kanoi Industries P. Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-16-2003
Reported in: (2003)182CTR(Cal)427,[2003]261ITR488(Cal)
D.K. Seth, J.1. Learned counsel for the appellant points out that this appeal involves a substantial question of law. There cannot be any computation of interest payable under Section 201(1A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, until there has been a deduction inasmuch as unless there is a deduction, there is no question of actual payment and unless there is an actual payment and the date of such actual payment is discernible, no interest can be levied under Section 201(1A) of the Act. According to him, there is no direct decision on this point except one by the Tribunal in Ess Kay Construction v. Asst. CIT [1997] 58 Taxman 32. Relying on this decision, he contended that interest under Section 201(1A) was not leviable because the date of payment of tax deducted at source being not known, the interest was incapable of being calculated. The language used in Section 201(1A) is different from the language used in Sections 220(2) and 221. Under Section 220(2) interest is chargeable from the date i...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. National Standard Duncan Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-15-2003
Reported in: (2003)180CTR(Cal)329,[2003]260ITR97(Cal),[2003]132STC298(Cal)
D.K. Seth, J. 1. Leave is granted to Mr. A. K. Dey to file vakalatnama within two weeks. 2. The Income-tax Officer and the appellate authority disallowed the claim for deduction of a sum of Rs. 4,05,744 under Section 43B of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The learned Tribunal overruled the same and allowed the deduction. The Commissioner of Income-tax, West Bengal-II, Calcutta, sought this reference under Section 256(1) of the Act The question formulated is : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and having regard to Rule 41D and Rule 45(3) of the Bombay Sales Tax Rules, the Tribunal was right in law in deleting the disallowance of Rs. 4,05,744 under Section 43B of the Act ?' 3. In order to appreciate the question, it is necessary to refer to Rule 41D and Rule 45(3) of the Bombay Sales Tax Rules. Rule 41D provides for grant of draw back, set off or refund of the aggregate of the sums determined in accordance with the provisions of Rule 44D in respect of purchases made b...
Tetron Commercial Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-15-2003
Reported in: (2003)182CTR(Cal)124,[2003]261ITR422(Cal)
ORDERD.K. Seth, J.The question1. This appeal, under Section 260A of IT Act arising out of the order dt. 18th Jan., 1999, passed by the Tribunal, A Bench, Calcutta, in ITA No. 1422/Cal/1993 in respect of asst. yr. 1989-90, was admitted on the following grounds :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the interest on borrowed capital to the extent it was invested in immovable properties in question was not allowable as business expenditure under Section 36(1)(iii)/37(1) of the IT Act, 1961, and whether the finding of the Tribunal is perverse ?'Appellant's submission2. The learned counsel for the appellant contended that the Tribunal's finding was perverse having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case. He pointed out the perversity, leading us through the materials placed before this Court. The immovable property was purchased for the purpose of business of the assessee who had already commenced the business...
Umapada Bhui and ors. Vs. Steel Authority of India and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-15-2003
Reported in: (2003)2CALLT78(HC),(2003)IIILLJ691Cal
Amitava Lala, J. 1. This writ petition has been made by the nine petitioners being teachers of different schools under Durgapur Steel Plant, a unit of Steel Authority of India Limited originally appointed as 'master' under the Education Department of the Plant by the pen of Additional Chief Personnel Manager. They had challenged a Memorandum of Settlement on restructuring of non-executive work organisation relating to Education Department of Durgapur Steel Plant dated 29th August, 2002 duly signed by the Management of Steel Authority of India Limited, Durgapur Steel Plant on one hand and workmen of Durgapur Steel Plant represented by the three unions i.e. Hindusthan Steel Employees' Union, Hindusthan Steel Workers' Union and Durgapur Steel Shramik Union respectively on the other hand. There is no dispute as to the representative capacity of the said three unions. The dispute is whether the teachers can be treated as 'workmen', if not, the unions representing the 'workmen' cannot sign t...
Marshall Corporation Ltd. and anr. Vs. the State of West Bengal and or ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-15-2003
Reported in: AIR2004Cal145
ORDERK.J. Sengupta, J.1. In this writ petition the petitioners, being operators of amongst other trucks and trippers have challenged the order of the Taxing Officer, Barrackpore 24-Parganas (North) whereby and whereunder the aforesaid authority had imposed additional road tax under West Bengal Motor Vehicles Tax Act 1979 on the 54 vehicles. The admitted position is that the registration of the vehicles viz., trucks and trippers has been done in this State.2. Mr. Arabinda Chatterjee submits that if one goes by the definition given in the said Statute, these vehicles are not liable to be charged with additional road tax, unless these vehicles have been registered in West Bengal and do not hold any inter-State permit. According to him, these vehicles are classified under the schedule 'C' of the aforesaid Act. The vehicles do not fall within the definition as above. He further submits that the tax can be levied going by the definition given in the Act itself and not at all. In support of h...
Peerless Hotels Ltd. Vs. Joint Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-14-2003
Reported in: (2004)88ITD363Cal
1. The assessee is in appeal before us against the order of the CIT(A) who disallowed the assessee's claim of Rs. 38,12,980 under Section 80-IA.2. The facts of the case as stated in the assessment order are that the assessee company is engaged in the business of running hotel in Kolkata, Port Blair and Mukutmanipur. The assessee claimed deduction under Section 80-IA to the extent of Rs. 38,12,849. The building where the Hotel Peerless Inn is situated had been leased in favour of Peerless General Finance Investment Co. Ltd. by the State Government of West Bengal through the lease deed dated 26-3-1992. Subsequently, the assessee entered into an agreement with Peerless General Finance Investment Co. Ltd. through a lease Deed dated 20-7-1992 and later through another lease Deed dated 1 -4-1996 in which it was stipulated that the assessee-company shall run and the hotel Peerless Inn, Kolkata upon payment of rental charges of Rs. 18 lakhs per year and lease rent of Rs. 32 lakh per annum. Th...
Peerless Hotels Ltd. Vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-14-2003
Reported in: (2004)84TTJ(Kol.)504
1. The assessee is in appeal before us against the order of the CIT(A) who disallowed the assessee's claim of Rs. 38,12,980 under Section 80-IA.2. The facts of the case as stated in the assessment order are that the assessee company is engaged in the business of running hotel in Kolkata, Port Blair and Mukutmanipur. The assessee claimed deduction under Section 80-IA to the extent of Rs. 38,12,849. The building where the Hotel Peerless Inn is situated had been leased in favour of Peerless General Finance Investment Co. Ltd. by the State Government of West Bengal through the lease deed dt. 26th March, 1992. Subsequently, the assessee entered into an agreement with Peerless General Finance Investment Co. Ltd. through a lease deed dt. 20th July, 1992 and later through another lease deed dt. 1st April, 1996, in which it was stipulated that the assessee-company shall run and the hotel Peerless Inn, Kolkata upon payment of rental charges of Rs. 18 lakhs per year and lease rent of Rs. 32 lakh...
Durga Kamal Rice Mills Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-14-2003
Reported in: (2003)182CTR(Cal)546,[2003]260ITR269(Cal)
D.K. Seth, J.1. This reference has no merit and ought not to have been made. It is settled principle that the closing balance of the accounting year shall be the opening balance of the next year. On the facts available, the decisions of the Income-tax Officer, Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and the Appellate Tribunal are justified and legal and call for no interference.2. On a survey under Section 133A on January 12, 1988, in the premises of the firm at Saktigarh, a duplicate set of ledger for the accounting year ending with 31st Chaitra 1393 B. S. corresponding to April 14, 1987, being the relevant assessment year 1987-88 was found. A profit and loss account and a balance-sheet drawn up on the basis of the duplicate ledger were also found. In the said account, the capital balance on the first day of the accounting year ended on April 14, 1987, was higher than the closing balance in the capital account as on April 14, 1986, by an amount of Rs. 2,00,024. This was sought to be expl...
Lohia Mandilia and ors. Vs. C.E.S.C. Ltd. and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-14-2003
Reported in: AIR2003Cal233
ORDERKalyan Jyoti Sengupta, J.1. By this single judgment the aforesaid two matters can be disposed of as the facts and law involved therein are identically same. Shorn of details of the fact made out in both the writ petitions it would be suffice to narrate the short fact. In both the cases the petitioners, are consumers of M/s. CESC Ltd., being the respondent No. 1. On 4th September, 2000 one of the three phases of electric connection of the premises of the petitioners was gutted in fire, as a result whereof, the same was destroyed. On information the CESC officials came to restore the supply line after removing defect occurred due to fire. However, the line was not restored, despite repeated request and representations. On the contrary CESC authorities took a false plea of pilferage of electric energy, by means of tampering of seals of the meters. So, CESC sent a bill of huge amount for payment as condition precedent for restoration of supply line. The petitioners approached concerne...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »