Kolkata Court April 1996 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Sudarsan Sanki Vs. State of West Bengal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-16-1996
Reported in: 1996CriLJ2785
Asish Baran Mukherjee, J.1. The appeal arises out of conviction and sentence passed by Judge. Special Court under E.C. Act, Midnaporc on 30-1-88 in DEBGR Case No. 51/84 arising out of Ghabal P.S. Case No. 5 dated 8-9-84 whereby the accused appellant was sentenced to S.I. for 1 year and fine of Rs. 1000/- in default further S.I. for 1 month.2. The case of the prosecution in short is that in course of inspection of the shop rooms of the accused appellant on 8-9-84 the Inspector found mobil oil and high speed diesel oil exposed for sale. The stock book for mobil oil was written up to 8-9-84. one stock-cum rate board was also found under the name of the accused appellant which was written up to 1-9-84 and stock of mobil oil and USD oil were shown as 665 litres and 662 litres respectively. The appellant had a licence for lubricating oil but there was no licence for keeping HSD oil whose quantity was found to be 900 litres. Accordingly, for violation of the West Bengal Motor Spirit and High ...
Subroto Ghose and Satyabroto Ghose Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Wealt ...
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-12-1996
Reported in: (1996)58ITD517(Kol.)
1. These six appeals arise out of a common order of the CWT(A)-V, Calcutta, dt. 30th Sept., 1993, for the asst. yrs. 1989-90 to 1991-92.2. We shall first take the Departmental appeals. All the three appeals filed by the Department are filed belatedly. The order of the CWT(A) was communicated to the Department on 6th Oct., 1993, and hence the due date for filing the appeals ended on 5th Dec., 1993, whereas the appeals were presented on 7th Dec., 1993, resulting in a delay of two days in filing the appeals. A condonation petition was filed in this regard wherein it was mentioned that 5th December, being Sunday, the papers could not be prepared on that date. However, the papers were prepared on 6th Dec., 1993, and the same were filed on 7th Dec., 1993, resulting in a delay of 2 days. As we are satisfied that the delay is supported by reasonable cause, we condone the delay and proceed to dispose of the appeals on merits.3. The two common grounds raised by the Revenue in all the three appe...
Sri Hanuman Steel Rolling Mill and Another Vs. C.E.S.C. Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-12-1996
Reported in: AIR1996Cal449
ORDER1. All these writ applications involving common questions of law and factwere taken up for hearing together and are being disposed of by'this common judgment.2. The petitioners in all the cases are consumers of electrical energy having obtained electrical connection from the respondent-company but their electrical connection had been disconnected on diverse dates by the Officers of Loss Control Cell of C.E.S.C. Ltd. upon surprise inspections and having allegedly found that the petitioners have indulged in theft or pilferage of electrical energy.3. In some matters, affidavits-in-opposition have been filed by the C.E.S.C. Ltd. where in almost stereo type statements have been made that upon inspection the meter body of the meter installed in the premises of the consumers were found spurious and/or the seals of the service cut out were found missing or the seals on the meter body were found tampered.4. In almost all the cases the petitioners carry on business or trades and their griev...
Milan Sen Vs. Guardian Plasticote Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-12-1996
Reported in: [1998]91CompCas105(Cal)
Baboo Lall Jain, J. 1. The petitioners instituted this suit, inter alia, for the following reliefs : '(a) Declaration that resolution to issue new shares in defendant No. 1 passed in the meeting of the board of directors of defendant No. f on December 30, 1992, and all acts in pursuance thereof are illegal, null and void.(b) Declaration that the letter of offer dated January 20, 1993, offering issuance of 68,000 equity shares of defendant No. 1 and all steps taken thereunder are illegal, null and void,(c) Perpetual injunction be issued restraining the defendants from giving any effect or further effect to the purported board resolution dated December 30, 1992, for issue of 68,000 equity shares of defendant No. 1 and from giving or issuing the said 68,000 equity shares or any new shares of defendant No. 1.(d) Decree directing delivery up of all the letters of offer issued by defendant No. 1 relating to issue of 68,000 equity shares so that the same may be adjudged void and be cancelled....
Phulchand Viswakarma Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-12-1996
Reported in: (1997)1CALLT57(HC)
Samaresh Banerjea, J. 1. The petitioner who claims himself to be a manufacture and seller of accessories of pneumatic tools has challenged in the instant writ petition the alleged illegal and arbitrary action of the respondent in entering in to rate contract for accessories of pneumatic tools pursuant to the impugned tender notice inviting tender for rate contract in respect of pneumatic tools. 2. The tender notice being No. WMT-6/RC-3845/PH. TOOLS/95-96/ 16 dated 19th April 1994 was issued by the Directorate General of Supplies and Disposal and was published in vol. 352 No. 7 of the Indian Trade Journal (annexure A to the writ petition). Admittedly such tender was invited, as it will appear from the tender notice itself in respect of various pneumatic tools specified in the tender notice for the rate contract period from 1st of September 1995 to 31st October 1996. It is the contention of the petitioner since admittedly such tender notice was issued only for supply of pneumatic tools a...
Md. Nural Islam Vs. the Ad-hoc Committee, Primary School Council and o ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-12-1996
Reported in: (1996)2CALLT136(HC),100CWN736
Dipak Prakash Kundu, J.1. In this writ application the Writ Petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs :'(a) A writ in the nature of a writ of Mandamus commanding the respondents not to give any effect and further effect to the impugned order contained in memo No. 2793 dated 26.7.91 and 4063 dated 26.11.91 issued by the respondents Nos. 1 and 2 and further commanding the said respondents to rescind, withdraw, and/or set aside the said order.(b) A writ in the nature of a writ of Mandamus commanding the respondents to reconsider his prayer for extension of service and extend the service of the Petitioner on year to year basis till he attains the year of 65 years.(c) A writ in the nature of a writ of certiorari directing the respondents to certify and to transmit this Hon'ble Court the records of the case within such time as may be fixed including the order contained in memo No. 2793 dated 26.7.91 and memo No. 4063 dated 26. 11. 91 at the time of hearing of the rule so that consciona...
Subroto Ghose and Satyabroto Ghose (Trust) Vs. Assistant Commissioner ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-12-1996
Reported in: (1996)56TTJ(Cal)79
ORDERD. MANMOHAN, J. M. :These six appeals arise out of a common order of the CWT(A)-V, Calcutta, dt. 30th Sept., 1993, for the asst. yrs. 1989-90 to 1991-92.2. We shall first take the Departmental appeals. All the three appeals filed by the Department are filed belatedly. The order of the CWT(A) was communicated to the Department on 6th Oct., 1993, and hence the due date for filing the appeals ended on 5th Dec., 1993, whereas the appeals were presented on 7th Dec., 1993, resulting in a delay of two days in filing the appeals. A condonation petition was filed in this regard wherein it was mentioned that 5th December, being Sunday, the papers could not be prepared on that date. However, the papers were prepared on 6th Dec., 1993, and the same were filed on 7th Dec., 1993, resulting in a delay of 2 days. As we are satisfied that the delay is supported by reasonable cause, we condone the delay and proceed to dispose of the appeals on merits.3. The two common grounds raised by the Revenue ...
Hindusthan Lever Limited Vs. Godrej Soaps Limited and Others
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-11-1996
Reported in: AIR1996Cal367,(1997)1CALLT123(HC),100CWN562
ORDER1. This hearing arises out of an application for temporary injunction filed on behalf of the plaintiff. In the suit the plaintiff prays for leave under Clause 12 of the Letters Patent. Decree for permanent injunction restraining the defendants, their servants, agents, and assignees etc. from in any way in fringing or attempting to infringe Patent No. 170171 of the plaintiff; Decree for permanent injunction restraining the defendants, their servants, agents etc. from in any way manufacturing, selling or offering for sale or advertising any toilet soap bearing the Trade Mark 'VIGIL' or any other trade mark and having the composition that is covered under and/or within the range of Patent No. 170171 of the plaintiff. Delivery upon oath of all toilet soaps already manufactured and in possession, power and custody of the defendant No. 1 and/or the defendants Nos. 2 and 3 and/ or their agents and servants that in any way infringe and/ or have been manufactured in accordance with the Pat...
The Workmen of Food Corporation of India and ors. Vs. Union of India ( ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-11-1996
Reported in: (1997)IILLJ462Cal
ORDERNikhil Nath Bhattacharjee, J.1. In this writ application the petitioner, the workmen of Food Corporation of India representing the workers of FCI, Calcutta has challenged an award dated December 7, 1983 passed by the Presiding Officer, Central Government Industrial Tribunal, Calcutta in Reference No. 1 of 1978 and Reference No. 8 of 1979, heard together and published by the Central Government by a notification dated January 4, 1984.2. It appears that in Reference No. 1 of 1978 involving 19 workers of the FCI, Calcutta the Government of India in the Ministry of Labour by order dated August 5, 1977 made the reference with the issue as mentioned below;-'Whether the action of the management of the Food Corporation of India, Calcutta in dismissing the undermentioned 10 workmen from service is justified? If not, to what relief are the said workmen entitled?' The names and particulars of the 19 workmen are noted. In the Reference No. 8 of 1979 in respect of 27 workmen including the 19 wo...
Machino Techno Sales (P.) Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-08-1996
Reported in: (1996)59ITD303(Kol.)
Where order sought to be revised was in confirmity with Tribunal's earlier order in assessee's own case, same could not be termed as erroneous though some prejudice was caused to revenue by such order.The application of the lower rate of tax on the assessee-company on the footing that it is an industrial company, being in conformity with the order of the Tribunal for an earlier year, which, in turn, had applied the judgments of the two High Courts, cannot be stated to be erroenous, though some prejudice might have been caused to the revenue by way of loss of revenue. But, it is not only enough that some prejudice is caused to the revenue but it is further necessary that the order sought to be revised by the Commissioner should also be erroneous. The order sought to be revised in the present case, not being erroneous, is not amenable to the jurisdiction of the Commissioner under section 263.Revision under s. 263--JURISDICTION OF CIT--Order already set right by invoking s. 154.Where ass...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »