Kolkata Court October 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.
Chroma Business Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-17-2003
Reported in: (2004)82TTJ(Kol.)540
1. The assessee has filed this appeal against the order passed by CIT under Section 263 of the Act, dt. 18th March, 2002, for the asst. yr, 1997-98 on the following grounds: "1. For that, the CIT erred in holding that the assessment of the appellant for the asst. yr. 1997-98 was erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of Revenue and in setting aside the same for de novo assessment after enquiry/investigation. 2. For that, the CIT erred in holding that the appellant had booked any loss or that the assessment completed on 28th March, 2000, was made without proper enquiry, investigation or verification as regards genuineness of share-transactions. 3. For that, the assumption of jurisdiction under Section 263 was illegal and the purported findings contained in the impugned order are wholly erroneous, without any material or evidence and contrary to facts and law and perverse." 2. The assessee filed the return showing total income of Rs. 24,96,909.The AO completed the assessment under Se...
In Re: State of West Bengal and Etc.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-13-2003
Reported in: 2004CriLJ1594
1. Heard the learned Advocate General for State. This Court has also heard some other learned counsel, viz. Mr. Rajesh Kumar Ganguly, Mr. Chitta Ranjan Panda, Mr. Sumanta Chakraborty, Mr. Supradlp Roy, Mr. Soumltra Bandopadhyay, Mr. Kallol Guha Thakurta, Mr. Idris Ali, even though the parties for which those counsel addressed this Court, are not on record. This Court has heard those learned counsel since the matter has generated some amount of public interest.2. This appeal has been filed by the State under Clause 16 of the Letters Patent against the order dated 29th September, 2003, passed by the learned single Judge in exercise of suo motu power, under the contempt of Courts Act. An application has also been filed for stay of the said order. The learned Advocate General while arguing in support of the appeal and the application for stay has made it clear that the contempt proceedings, which have been initiated against the police authorities, are not maintainable in law. The learned A...
Shyam Sunder Dalmia (Huf) Vs. Dy. Cit
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-07-2003
Reported in: (2004)87TTJ(Kol.)1114
This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the learned Commissioner (Appeals) dated 28-10-2002 for the assessment year 1998-99.(1) For that the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) confirming the order of assessment is arbitrary, erroneous, illegal and perverse and has been passed without application of mind. None of the argument raised in course of the appellate proceedings as well as various materials and evidences including remand report given by the assessing officer were referred to and/or dealt by the Commissioner (Appeals) while passing the order.(2) For that the Commissioner (Appeals) passed the order by ignoring the relevant materials and evidence available on record by relying on erroneous facts and on irrelevant and extraneous consideration. Various allegations, purported finding and observation against the appellant have been made without any basis or material and on mere suspicion, surmises and conjectures.(3) For that the Commissioner (Appeals) er...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›