SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1965 Supreme(Cal) 18

G.K.MITTER, S.A.MASUD
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX – Appellant
Versus
SUDHIR KUMAR LAHA – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
A.C.ROY, B.GUPTA, B.K.DATTA, P.C.MUKHERJI, S.MUKHERJEE

MITTER, J.

( 1 ) THIS is a reference under Section 66 (1) of the Act the question referred being-"whether on the facts and circumstances of the case the assessment under Section 34 (1) (a) was correctly set aside ?"

( 2 ) THE facts are as follows : One Joggeswar Laha by his will dated December 22, 1920 appointed his wife Nrityakali Dassi, his nephew Anath Krishna Laha and one Radha Kanto Paul as executrix, executors and trustees of his will. He bequeathed his business solely to his said nephew and devised and dedicated rights in his properties both movable and immovable and all the rest and residue of his estate including the outstandings of his business to various religious and charitable trusts. He further directed thereby that his executrix, executors and trustees should stand possessed of all his properties both movable and immovable upon trust to collect all his assets and spend Rs. 5,000/- for the purpose of his Adyashradha ceremony and the sum of Rs. 2500/-for the similar ceremony of his wife and erect three temples on premises Nos. 11/2 and 11/3, Baburam Ghose Lane at a cost of not less than Rs. 25,000/ -. The said executrix, executors and trustees were to consecrate and e





Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top