Court : Orissa
Reported in : AIR1949Ori60; [1949]17ITR256(Orissa)
NARASIMHAM, J. - The questions referred to us for opinion by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Calcutta Branch, Patna, are as follows :-(1) Whether, in the circumstances of the case and on the findings of the Tribunal, the income, profits or gains in question or any part thereof accrued or arose within an Indian State and, if so, whether such income, profits or gains were received or deemed to have been received in or were brought into British India ?(2) Whether Section 42(3) of the Income-tax Act is applicable to the facts of the case The assessees headquarters is at Cuttack and he has been assessed to income-tax for the year 1943-44 in respect of his dealings in (a) nux vomica and (b) hides, horns, bones etc., which were gathered by him from several Orissa States and sold at several places in British India through his commission agents known as arhatias. The cash realised by these arhatias from the sales of the aforesaid products were all remitted to the head office at Cuttack. The ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : (2008)106CALLT192(NULL)
A.K. Ganguly, C.J.1. This batch of Writ Petitions were heard together as common questions of facts and law are involved and these different Writ Petitions were filed in respect of different assessment years by the Petitioner.2. The Petitioner claims to be a non-Banking Finance Company licensed by the Reserve Bank of India to carry on business in leasing as well as hire purchase, inter alia, of plant, machinery and other equipments.3. On or about. 31st July, 1995 a tripartite agreement was entered between the Petitioner company, and M/s. Indian Metals and Ferro Alloys Limited (IMFA) and M/s. Isgee John Thompson CUT'). Under the said agreement IMFA was referred to as the 'user', IJT was referred to as 'supplier I contractor' and the Petitioner as the 'purchaser'.4. IMFA wanted to instal a 90 Ton Per Hour (TPH) Spreader Stoker Water Tube Boiler at its Choudwar Power Plant of M/s. Indian Charge Chrome Ltd. (ICCL), which is a sister concern of IMFA. For in...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : 2007(II)OLR452
ORDERM.M. Das, J.1. Several Vigilance Cases have been instituted against the present petitioner. Allegations in all the cases, except one, are for commission of alleged offence punishable under Sections 120B/420/467/468/472 IPC read with Section 13(2) and 13(i)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.2. The prosecution alleges that the then Managing Director of Orissa Rural Housing Development Corporation (for short, 'the Corporation') in conspiracy with the other subordinate officials of the said Corporation and private builders sanctioned and disbursed loan amounting to crores of rupees by bifurcating the said money into small individual loans limited to Rs. 5,00,000/-. It is further alleged that in such method, as the money, which is meant for the rural poor people, was advanced to private builders who have also admittedly become chronic defaulters in repaying the said loans and, as such, the Corporation has sustained huge loss. The petitioner was working as the Accounts Office...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : 108(2009)CLT821; 2009(II)OLR902
S.K. Mishra, J.1. The matter is taken up for disposal at the stage of admission.2. This is a revision application under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, hereinafter referred as 'the Code', for brevity, wherein the defendant Nos. 1 & 2 have called in question, the legality of the order passed by the learned Civil Judge (Jr. Divn.). Rourkela in Civil Suit No. 29 of 2007 refusing the prayer of the defendants to reject the plaint under Order 7 Rule 11 of the Code on the ground of gross under valuation of the suit.3. The simple facts giving rise to this revision application are that the opp.party No. 1 filed Civil Suit No. 29 of 2007 in the Court of the Civil Judge (Jr. Divn.), Rourkela seeking the declaration that he and defendant Nos. 3,4, & 5 are the real owners of the suit land on the basis of adverse possession and to declare the Sale Deed No. 26362 dated 12.6.2007 in favour of the defendant No. 2 to be null and void. It is undisputed at the stage that the sale deed in...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : 2007(I)OLR133
A.K. Samantaray, J.1. In this writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India the petitioner challenges the Government order under Annexure-16 disallowing approval of her appointment and payment of Grant-in-aid from the date of her appointment to the post of lecturer in English in Tangi Mahavidyalaya, Kotsahi, in the district of Cuttack and has prayed for quashment of the said annexure and for issue of a direction mandating the opposite parties to approve her appointment and to pay her Grant-in-aid from the date of her appointment, i.e., from 1.11.1991.2. The case of the petitioner as averred in the writ petition is that she is a lecturer in English of Tangi Mahavidyalaya, Kotsahi which was affiliated to the Utkal University vide Annexure-1 in Intermediate Arts with 65 seats in English and other subjects. On the formation of the Council of Higher Secondary Education, Orissa, the Council under Annexure-2 dated 31.3.1984 extended its affiliation for Higher Secondary...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : 1985(I)OLR291; (1985)TaxL.R.2497
S.C. Mohapatra, J.1. All the petitioners, thirty-nine in number, carry on the business of purchase of Mohua flowers in the State of Orissa and export of the same outside the State. They have assailed the legality and validity of the Board's Excise ( Fixation of Fees on Mohua Flowers) Rules 1976, and, in particular, notification No. 454-XIV. 3/82-EX. dated the 5th February, 1982, enhencing the rate of fee for issue of pass to export Mohuaflower. As all the writ applications involve common question of law, they are heard together and shall be disposed of by this Judgment. 2. Mohua flower is the matured sugary flower of Mohua tree the botanical name of which is Bassia Latifolia or Bassia Longifolia. These trees grow in abundance in the forests of Orissa and also in some private lands. A reference to the commercial Products of India by Sir George Watt, published in the year 1908 at Page-118 and the Silviculture of India. Trees, Volume 11 by Mr. R. S. Troup, published in 1921 at page-( 41 b...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : AIR2001Ori24
ORDERCh. P.K. Misra, J.1. In this Election Petition, petitioner Ananga Udaya Singh Deo has challenged the election of Respondent No. 1 Ranga Nath Mishra, and respondent No. 3 Manmath Nath Das, as Members of Council of States (hereinafter referred to as 'Rajya Sabha') in the election held on 18th June, 1998.2. Brief facts of the case are as follows :--The President of India issued a notification, which was published in the Gazette of India on 30-5-1998, calling upon the Members of the Electoral College of some of the States to elect Members to the Rajya Sabha in accordance with the provisions of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (for short 'the Act'). Pursuant to the aforesaid Presidential Notification, the Election Commission by its notification dated 30-5-1998 called upon the elected Members of the Orissa Legislative Assembly to elect three Members to the Rajya Sabha. In consultation with the Government of Orissa, the Election Commission also issued another notification appoi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : 1995(I)OLR288
A. Pasayat, J. 1. Petitioner claims to be a (minority institution in terms of Article 30 of the Constitution of India 19 (in short, the 'Constitution'), and questions authority of the Inspector of Schools, Sambalpur (opp. party no. 3) to constitute a managing committee in-terms of the provisions of Orissa Education (Establishment, Recognition and Management of Private Schools) Rues, 1991 (in short, the 'Rules'). According to the petitioner-institution which is represented through Sri Chandan Sigh Negi stated to be its President, is a Hindi medium school, and therefore, the Orissa Education Act, 1969 (in short, the 'Act') has no application. Stand of the State is that institution is not a minority institution. Some members of staff of the institution have prayed to be impleaded as parties.2. Facts necessary to render the decision are as follows :It is the case of the petitioner that managing committee of the institution was re-constituted by order dated 13-11-1990 (Annexure-3) to the wr...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : AIR1950Ori146
Jagannadha Das, J.1. Cri Misc. No. 107 of 1949: The petitioner in this case has applied to this Court under Section 491, Criminal P. C., questioning the validity of an order of detention dated 20th April 1949, passed against him, by the Government of Orissa, under Section 2, Orisaa Maintenance of Public Order Act, The petition is dated 4th June 1949, and has been forwarded to this Court through the Superintendent of Cuttack Jail where he was under detention. It bas been stated to us by the Advocate-General on behalf of the Government that this petitioner has since absconded and has gone underground. When this petition came up for hearing before us on 17th and 18th of August, we intimated to the counsel appearing for the petitioner that we would not be prepared to consider the application unless the petitioner presented himself in Court and made himself available receiving the orders of the Court. The petition was adjourned for consideration to 22nd; but the petitioner has not turned up...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : 57(1984)CLT355; 1984(I)OLR340
B.K. Behera, J.1. On July 10, 1981, a petition of complaint was made in the Court of the learned Subdivisional Judicial Magistrate, Baripada, by the opposite party No. 1, as the complainant, against the petitioner, the opposite party No. 2 and Smt. Ginidevi Saha for commission of offences punishable under Sections 241, 366 and 498 of the Indian Penal Code. The learned Subdivisional Judicial Magistrate recorded the initial statement of the opposite party No. 1 and fixed August 11, 1981 as the date of inquiry under Section 202 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Act No. 2 of 1974), to be referred to hereinafter as the Code, with a direction to the opposite party No. 1 to produce all his witnesses, On the date fixed for inquiry, the learned Subdivisional Judicial Magistrate made a direction to send copies of the complaint and the initial statement of the opposite party No. 1 to the court of Mr G. P. Rao, Judicial Magistrate, First Class, to hold the inquiry under Section 202 of the C...
Tag this Judgment!