Court : Kolkata
Reported in : 1973CriLJ407
Anil Kumar Sen, J.1. These three Rules issued on three applications under Section 491 of the Code of Criminal Procedure have been heard together as they involve common questions of law and fact. The subject-matter of challenge in the three Rules is the detention of three persons Rabindra Chakravarty alias Gora, Sujit Kumar Mukherjee alias Tapan and Ajit Kumar Mukherjee alias Naru, Rabindra Chakravarty has been put to detention under an order dated July 6. 1971 passed by the District Magistrate. Hooghly in exercise of his powers under Section 3(1) read with Section 3(3) of the West Bengal Prevention of Violent Activities Act, 1970 The object of detention being to prevent the detenu from acting in any manner prejudicial to the securitv of the State or the maintenance of public order. Suiit Kumar Mukherjee and Ajit Kumar Mukherjee have been out to detention under similar orders re-selectively dated July 9, 1971 and July 24, 1971. Ajit and Sujit are the two brothers. The grounds for detent...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1972Cal295
..... to stoppage of work in the first instance from march to august, 1956 when cement, steel were not available and then again from september to november., 19.57 after the nationalisation of the insurance company before it was definitely decided as to the course of action to be taken with regard to the construction of the building. the contractor's claim .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : [1972]85ITR531(Cal)
A.N. Sen, J.1. A question of some importance relating to the applicability of Section 49D of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, in the matter of granting relief to the assessee in respect of the dividend received by the assessee on its investment in shares in joint stock companies in England arises in this reference made under Section 66(1) of the said Act by the Tribunal at the instance of the department.2. The question referred by the Tribunal is :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee could be said to have paid income-tax in U. K. by deduction or otherwise in respect of the net dividends of Rs. 15,266 so as to be eligible for the relief contemplated by Section 49D of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922?'3. Two main contentions which have been urged and which fall for consideration in the instant reference, are :'(1) Whether the sum deducted from the amount of dividend payable to the assessee constitutes payment of income-tax by the assessee by deduction ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : [1972]85ITR500(Cal)
..... bridge and engineering co., [1930] 99 l.j. (k.b.) 261, 263, 264: 'if the learned county court judge had properly directed himself, and was referred to tannoch v. brownieside coal co., [1929] sc. 99 ; [1929] a.c. 642 and had read it, and using his local knowledge, and his knowledge as a man, as he is entitled to do, of .....
Tag this Judgment!