Advanced Search Results
Union of India and ors. Vs. Shashi Deo Jha
Kolkata
Apr-26-1999
Customs
Constitution of India - Articles 14, 19, 21 and 226;; Customs House Agents Licensing Regulation, 1984 - Regulations 9, 13, 14, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 21(2) and 23 - Rules 8 and 9;; Customs Act, 1962 - Sections 108, 129 and 129(1);; Forest Act - Sections 3 to 5, 5A and 5A(1);; Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 - Sections 33B and 33B(1);; Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 - Sections 3(1 and 3) and 4
(2000)1CALLT537(HC),1999(66)ECC640,1999(113)ELT385(Cal)
Shibdas Banerjee, Adv.
S.B. Sinha, J. 1. This appeal is directed against a Judgment and order dated 4th January, 1999 passed by a learned single Judge of this court whereby and whereunder the writ petition filed by the 1st...
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskBhagwati Prasad Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Kolkata
Apr-17-2003
Customs
General Clauses Act - Section 27; ;Customs Act, 1962 - Sections 110, 110(1), 110(2), 124 and 153
(2003)184CTR(Cal)12
Shibdas Banerjee, ;Biswanath Samaddar and ;Mintu Kumar Goswami, Advs.
D.K. Seth, J.1.A very interesting but short question has been raised by Mr. Pranab Kumar Dutta, learned counsel, appearing for the appellant. Some goods were seized from the petitioner/appellant on 27th Feb., 2001. A notice under...
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskUnion of India (Uoi) Vs. Ajabul Biswas
Kolkata
Oct-03-2007
Arbitration
Contract Act - Sections 73 and 74; ;Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 - Sections 13(5), 16(6), 31, 34, 34(2) and 34(4); ;Arbitration Act, 1940 - Sections 29 and 33; ;Arbitration (Protocol and Convention) Act, 1937; ;Foreign Awards (Recognition and Enforcement) Act, 1961; ;International Commercial Arbitration and Conciliation Rules
2008(2)ARBLR209(Cal),(2007)3CALLT634(HC),2008(1)CHN16
Shibdas Banerjee, Sr. Adv., ;Ambar Majumdar and ;K.R. Das, Advs.
Ashim Kumar Banerjee, J.Facts:1. The appellant entrusted the respondent to construct guardwall to protect erosion of the river Ganga near Farakka. The job was to be completed within 90 days commencing from May 1, 1982. Site...
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask18-section briefs on any result in this list
Everett (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Collector of Customs
Kolkata
Dec-15-2003
Customs
Constitution of India - Article 226
2004(166)ELT315(Cal)
Shibdas Banerjee, Sr. Adv., ;R. Mukherjee, ;S.K. Roy Chowdhury and ;Pradip Ghosh, Advs.
ORDERSengupta, J.1. The petitioner in this application has challenged the show cause notice issued by the Customs authorities on the ground of alleged short landing of materials. The petitioner is the steamer agent and, as such,...
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskB. Arun Kumar and Co. Vs. Commissioner of Customs
Kolkata
May-12-2004
Customs
Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (Procedure) Rules, 1982 - Rule 41; ;Customs Act, 1962 - Section 129B
2005(180)ELT152(Cal)
Shibdas Banerjee and ;Anmola Jha, Advs.
Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta, J.1. By this writ petition the petitioner approached this Court for implementation of the earlier order of the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal granting refund of the redemption fine and penalty...
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskRuma Moitra Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Kolkata
Nov-30-2004
ConstitutionCriminal
Constitution of India - Articles 21, 22(5) and 226; ;Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 - Sections 3(1), 3(3) and 110
(2005)2CALLT343(HC),2005(1)CHN290
Shibdas Banerjee, ;Himangshu Dey and ;Mintu Goswami, Advs.
Arun Kumar Bhattacharya, J.1. In this application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for habeas corpus, the petitioner has sought for release, on setting aside the Order of Detention, of her husband Sri Manas...
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskGenesis International Vs. Commissioner of Customs
Kolkata
Dec-22-2003
Customs
Customs Act, 1962 - Sections 76A and 76N; ;Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992
2004(173)ELT235(Cal)
Shibdas Banerjee, Senior Counsel and ;Biswanath Sammadar, Adv.
ORDERKalyan Jyoti Sengupta, J.1. By this application the petitioners have substantially challenged the enquiry in relation to the drawback received and/or receivable by the petitioner No. 1 for supplies made at Special Economic Zone under summons...
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskKadem Shaikh Vs. State of West Bengal
Kolkata
May-18-2007
NarcoticsCriminal
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (Amendment) Act, 2001 - Section 41 and 41(1); ;Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 - Sections 2, 21, 22 and 27; ;Appellate Side Rules - Rules 1 and 9; ;Constitution of India - Articles 14 and 20(1)
(2007)3CALLT129(HC),2007(3)CHN416
Balai Chandra Roy, Adv. General and ;A. Goswami, Adv.
Debiprasad Sengupta, J.1. Present reference is placed before us for deciding a question of law as to the constitutional validity of Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances (Amendment) Act of 2001 (Act 9 of 2001), specially the...
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskUnion of India (Uoi) Vs. Nandalal Kushwaha and ors.
Kolkata
Jun-29-2004
FERALimitation
Limitation Act, 1963 - Sections 4 to 24 and 29(2); ;Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 - Sections 52(2) and 54; ;Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999 - Sections 1(4), 35, 49, 49(1), 49(5), 49(6), 52, 52(1), 52(2), 52(3), 52(4) and 52(5); ;Repealing Act; ;General Clauses Act, 1897 - Section 6
2005(1)CHN594,2004(176)ELT78(Cal),[2005]64SCL342(Cal)
Arun Chatterjee, ;Anirban Mitra and ;Kaushik Biswas, Advs. FEA No. 4 of 2003 and GA No. 4062 of 2003 and ;Anjan Kumar Mukherjee and ;Manoranjan Daw, ;Bishnupada Jana, Advs. in FEA No. 1 of 2004 and GA
D.K. Seth, J.Background:1. An appeal under Section 52(2) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 (1973 Act) was pending before the Board when the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999 (1999 Act) came into force. By reason...
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskCommissioner of Income Tax Vs. Britannia Industries Ltd.
Kolkata
Jun-30-2005
Direct Taxation
Income Tax Act, 1961 - Sections 2(41), 36, 36(1) and 36(4)
(2005)198CTR(Cal)426,[2006]280ITR525(Cal)
Debi Prasad Pal, ;Malay Dhar and ;A. Sen, Advs.
ORDERD.K. Seth, J.1. In this case, the question that is to be answered is :'Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the interest-free advances were...
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskAI Brief (18 sections) + Semantic Search - 7 days free
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »