Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Mar-24-1981
Reported in : (1982)1CompLJ52(Cal),[1981]131ITR578(Cal)
M.M. Dutt, J.1. In this appeal, the revenue has challenged the propriety of the judgment of R. M. Datta J. : [1978]112ITR111(Cal) whereby the learned judge has made the rule nisi obtained by the respondent No. 1, Smt. Bani Roy Chowdhury, on her application under Article 226 of the Constitution, absolute.2. By a registered conveyance dated December 11, 1972, the respondent No. 1 purchased from the respondent No. 4, the Life Insurance Corporation of India, two plots of laud being plots Nos. 29/NA (E. P.) and 29/NA (W. P.) of Block B of the New Alipore Development Scheme, measuring 7 cottahs, at Rs. 5,000 per cottah. In the conveyance, the respondent No. 5, Hindusthan Building Society Ltd., was the confirming party. The said Society having been the controlled business of the Hindusthan Co-operative Insurance Society Ltd., its assets and liabilities were transferred to and vested in the Life Insurance Corporation of India on the appointed day, namely, September 1, 1956, by virtue of Sectio...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Jan-07-1981
Reported in : [1982]134ITR114(Cal)
Sabyasachi Mukharji, J.1. In this reference under Section 256(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961, the following question has been referred to this court: ' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and on a correct interpretation of Clause (1)(c)(iii)(B) of the second proviso to Para-graph F of the First Schedule to the Finance Act, 1965, the Tribunal was correct in holding that the amount by which the rebate from income-tax payable by the assessee should be reduced under the said clause should be computed with reference to the proposed dividend of Rs. 24,000 and not with reference to the dividend of Rs. 60,000 relating to the profits of the assessment year 1964-65 though declared and distributed during the previous year for the assessment year 1965-66 '2. The assessee is a private limited company engaged in the manufacture of plastic goods. The provisions of Section 104 of the I.T. Act apply in the case of the assessee. There is also no dispute that according to sub-el. (B) of...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Mar-05-1981
Reported in : (1982)26CTR(Cal)310,[1982]137ITR483(Cal)
Sabyasachi Mukharji, J.1. In this reference under Section 27(3) of the W.T. Act, 1957, the following questions have been referred to this court :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that in the instant case the land-cum-building method was the most appropriate method of valuation ? 2. If the answer to question No. 1 be in the negative, whether the correct method of valuation would be rental method based on the actual rent received from the property ?' 2. In order to appreciate the questions it would be relevant to refer to certain facts. The assessment years involved are 1964-65, 1965-66, 1966-67, 1967-68, 1968-69 and 1969-70 for which the respective valuation dates were 31-3-64, 31-3-65, 31-3-66, 31-3-67, 31-3-68 and 31-3-69. The question of valuation of the property at premises No. 8, Dover Park, Calcutta, on the respective valuation dates was involved in the appeals before the Tribunal leading to the present reference. The...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Jul-14-1981
Reported in : AIR1981Cal283,85CWN1012
B.C. Chakrabarti, J.1. This is a revisional application at the instance of the plaintiff and is directed against an order dated May 5, 1981 passed in T. S. No. 674 of 1977 now pending in the 7th Bench of the City Civil Court at Calcutta.2. The petitioner instituted the suit principally for a declaration that she is entitled to the full value including bonus in respect of a life insurance policy. Facts so far asthey are relevant for our present purposes are not disputed. Indrajit Sen, since deceased, was the holder of the life insurance policy and, the petitioner is the nominee of the policy holder. The policy holder having died on March 5, 1974, she lodged a claim for payment of the amount due under the policy. Initially the Life Insurance Corporation, the opposite party herein issued a discharge voucher to the petitioner for being duly filled in and returned to the Corporation. This was done but the Corporation thereafter agreed to pay only the paid up value of the policy on the groun...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Jul-31-1981
Reported in : AIR1982Cal96
ORDERSalil Kumar Roy Chowdhury, J.1. This is an application under Section 20 of the Arbitration Act, 1940, for filing the arbitration agreement dated 18th/23rd of Oct., 1979 and for order of reference of the dispute to the Arbitrator in terms of the arbitration agreement and consequential reliefs.2. By a letter dated 19th/23rd of Oct. 1979, the plaintiff/petitioner appointed the defendant/respondent purely on a temporary basis for a period of three months as the Clearing Agent at Calcutta for clearance of imported cargo improvement and local transportation jobs and other related items of works as set out in the said letter and also in paragraph 3 and sub-paragraphs thereof in the petition. Pursuant to the said agreement the defendant/respondent and the plaintiff/petitioner started acting as only Clearing Agent of the Calcutta Port on and from 1st of Nov. 1979, till 15th of Dec. 1980 as the terms were extended from time to time. During the period the defendant/respondent acted as the Cl...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Dec-14-1981
Reported in : AIR1983Cal445
Sabyasachi Mukharji, J. 1. This appeal arises out of an order and judgment of Mr. Justice Deb. Dt. June 11. 1981, refusing to stay a suit under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act, 1940. The learned Judge has recorded several points which were urged before him. He, however, did not find it necessary to deal with all those points but rested his decision on two points, viz.. that there were certain allegations in the nature of fraud which should better be tried in a public forum instead of private forum. He has also held that a substantial difficult question of law in the facts and circumstances of the case arises and according to the learned Judge, it should better be tried in a Court of law rather than by arbitration. It appears that the respondent carried certain quantity of lubricating oil under an agreement between the parties, to which we shall presently refer. It was alleged in the petition, which the respondent had denied, that out of this certain quantities of oil were contaminate...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Jul-23-1981
Reported in : AIR1981Cal440
ORDERSalil K. Roy Chowdhury, J.1. This is an application under Sections 5, 11, 12 and 15 of the Arbitration Act, 1940, inter alia for revoking the authority of the Arbitrator being Tribunal of Arbitration, Bengal Chamber of Commerce and Industry, in respect of Case No. 143 of 1977 pending before the same and for removal of the Arbitrator and appointment of a sole Arbitrator and consequential reliefs.2. The facts of the case which are not disputed are that by a contract in writing dated 29th of January, 1969, entered into between the parties, the respondent agreed to store imported non-edible tallow in Steel Storage Tank situated at Ram Nagar on the terms and conditions contained in the said contract. Under the said contract the respondent was appointed as the clearing storage. handling and forwarding agent in respect of the said tallow which was to be imported by the petitioner and stored in the said tank of the respondent on the terms and conditions of the said contract. The said stor...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Mar-02-1981
Reported in : [1982]138ITR111(Cal)
Sabyasachi Mukharji, J.1. In this reference under Section 256(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961, read with Section 19 of the Super Profits Tax Act, 1963, the following question has been referred to us :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the Debenture Sinking Fund of Rs. 2,32,8,123, Replacement and Contingencies Fund of Rs. 6,97,90,155 and Contingency Reserve Fund of Rs. 69,92,624 constituted reserves for the purpose of computing the capital of the assessee-company under the Second Schedule to the Super Profits Tax Act, 1963 ?'2. The assessee is the Calcutta Electric Supply Corporation Ltd., and the relevant assessment year is 1963-64. The assessee-company claimed as part of its Capital Debenture Sinking Fund Rs. 2,32,08,123, Reserve for Plant Expansion Rs. 6,97,90,155 and Contingency Reserve Fund of Rs. 69,92,624 to be part of its capital. The ITO rejected the assessee's claim on the ground that the funds were not allowable for th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Sep-06-1981
Reported in : [1983]142ITR45(Cal)
Sabyasachi Mukharji, J. 1. This reference relates to the assessment year 1964-65. The assessee is a private limited company and is engaged in the construction work of huge magnitude. The assessment year, as we have stated before, is 1964-65 and the relevant accounting year ended on 30th June, 1963. The assessee got a big contract from the Vizag Port authority for over Rs. 3 crores for construction of four berths of the Port.The contract was awarded during the accounting year relevant to the assessment year under reference, though the construction continued for 3 to 4 years. In order to do this job, the assessee had intimated to the Govt. of India that it should be allowed to import special types of cranes, machinery, dumpers, etc., from East European countries. The Government, however, insisted upon the assessee to import the aforesaid items from the U.S.A. as could be seen from the letter dated 26th June, 1961, addressed to the assessee by the Superintending Engineer, Vizag Port, The ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Aug-17-1981
Reported in : (1982)28CTR(Cal)345,[1983]140ITR272(Cal)
Sabyasachi Mukharji, J. 1. In this reference under Section 256(2) of the I.T. Act, 1961, as directed by this court, the following question has been referred to this court :' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in sustaining the disallowance of Rs. 13,99,305 being expenses incurred in connection with the issue of fresh lot of shares in 1967?'2. The question relates to the assessment year 1969-70 and the relevant accounting year ended on 30th June, 1968. The assessee issued 16,75,000 ordinary shares of Rs. 10 each at a premium and on that account incurred an expenditure of Rs. 13,99,305 and claimed the same as deductible expenses. The ITO disallowed the claim for deduction of Rs. 13,99,305 as he was of the view that the expenditure incurred by the assessee was on capital account. 3. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid order of the ITO, the assessee went up in appeal before the AAC. The AAC referred to the order of the ITO and observed that the ...
Tag this Judgment!