Kolkata Court January 2002 Judgments
Hindusthan Laminators Pvt. Ltd. Vs. C.C.E., Calcutta-i
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-28-2002
Reported in: 2002(83)ECC418,2002(141)ELT614(Cal)
ORDERPinaki Chandra Ghose, J. 1. The petitioner has challenged the orders passed by the Customs Excise & Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as CEGAT). The Tribunal on the application under Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act) directed the petitioner company to make a pre-deposit of Rs. 10 lacs out of a demand for duty of Rs. 86,54,835.69 and penalty of Rs. 9 lacs. The other order which has been challenged in the order dated July 6, 2001 filed by the petitioner-company for modification of the said order dated August 30, 2000 praying that it should not be required to make any pre-deposit.2. The basic dispute between the petitioner-company and the Central Excise Authorities is whether duties were required to be paid on duty paid jute fabrics after lamination. According to the Central Excise authorities such duty was required to be paid after lamination, the quantum thereof being equal to the duty already paid on the ...
Tag this Judgment!Simplex Concrete Piles (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of In ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-28-2002
Reported in: (2002)176CTR(Cal)353,[2002]255ITR49(Cal)
Pinaki Chandra Ghose, J.1. The writ petitioner in this application has challenged six notices all dated July 29, 1994, issued by the respondent-Department under Section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the said Act'), for reopening the assessments under Section 147 of the said Act, 1961, for the assessment years 1984-85 to 1989-90. The petitioner has also challenged approvals and/or satisfactions of respondent No. 2, the Commissioner of Income-tax, West Bengal, Range-VIII, Calcutta, under Section 151(1) of the said Act in respect of all the said assessment years. The petitioner has challenged the said notices under Section 148 of the said Act on the ground that the conditions precedent for the assessment under Section 147 of the said Act read with Section 148 of the said Act have not been satisfied and the requirements of law have not been fulfilled.2. The contentions of learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner are as follows :3. The assessments...
Tag this Judgment!income-tax Officer and ors. Vs. Shree Bajrang Commercial Co. (Pvt.) Lt ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-28-2002
Reported in: [2004]269ITR338(Cal)
Subhro Kamal Mukherjee, J.1. This appeal is directed against an order dated December 18, 1992, passed by a learned single judge of this court whereby the learned single judge allowed an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and, accordingly, quashed notices under Section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act').2. The writ petitioner-company was an assessee under the said Act and, admittedly, they have submitted their returns of income for the assessment years 1972-73 and 1973-74. Although orders of assessment for the said years were passed by the Income-tax Officer concerned, subsequently the Income-tax Officer issued notices under Section 148 of the said Act proposing to reopen the assessments in respect of the aforesaid assessment years.3. The present application under Article 226 was moved before this court challenging the said notices under Section 148 of the said Act contending, inter alia, that the Income-tax Officer was really harassing the assessee and ...
Tag this Judgment!ito and ors. Vs. Shree Bajrang Commercial Company (P) Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-28-2002
Reported in: (2002)174CTR(Cal)343
Subhro Kamal Mukherjee, J.This appeal is directed against an order dated 18-12-1992, passed by a learned single Judge of this court whereby the learned Single Judge allowed an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and, accordingly, quashed notices under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act).2. The writ petitioner- company was an assessee under the said Act and, admittedly, they have submitted their returns of income for the assessment years 1972-73 and 1973-74. Although orders of assessment for the said years were passed by the Income Tax Officer concerned, subsequently the Income Tax Officer issued notices under section 148 of the said Act proposing to reopen the assessments in respect of aforesaid assessment years.The present application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India was moved before this court challenging the said notices under section 148 of the said Act contending, inter alia, that the Income Tax Off...
Tag this Judgment!Nirmal Ghosh Bag Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-25-2002
Reported in: (2002)82ITD788Cal
1. This is an appeal by the assessee against the order of the AO under Section 158BC arising out of search and seizure proceedings.2. A preliminary objection about the validity of the assessment under Chapter XIV-B was raised by the assessee by way of the following two questions : "1. That the provisions of Section 158BA of IT Act, 1961 were not applicable in this case because the requisition under Section 132A was made much before 30th June, 1995. The invoking of the provisions of Chapter XIV-B of the IT Act in the facts of this case is ab witio wrong, illegal and without jurisdiction, and the assessment framed under Chapter XIV-B is a nullity and liable to be quashed. 2. That the conditions precedent for initiating action under Section 132 or 132A did not exist and were not satisfied. Therefore, the issuance of Warrant of Authorisation under Section 132A and all proceedings taken and order passed in pursuance thereof are wrong, illegal and bad-in-law." 3. These two grounds were rais...
Tag this Judgment!Jenson and Nicholson (India) Ltd. Vs. Industrial Investment Bank of In ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-25-2002
Reported in: AIR2002Cal73
ORDERBhaskar Bhattacharya, J. 1. Challenging an order dated November 27, 2001 passed by the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Calcutta in O.A. No. 51 of 2001, the petitioner in the past moved an application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India before this Court on December 6, 2001 when this Court refused to entertain the said revisional application onthe ground that the said order being an appealable one under Section 20 of the Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act. 1993 ('Act'), the petitioner should approach the Appellate Tribunal constituted under the Act. This Court however did not go into merit and permitted the learned advocate for the petitioner to take back the certified copy of the order impugned on furnishing a xerox copy thereof.2. Pursuant to the aforesaid order dated December 6, 2001 the petitioner preferred an appeal before the learned Appellate Tribunal under the Act being Appeal No. DRAT/ CAL-/A/21 of 2001 but the learned Appellate Tribunal by its order dat...
Tag this Judgment!Kothari Medical Centre and ors. Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-24-2002
Reported in: AIR2002Cal189
ORDERSengupta, J.1. In this writ petition the petitioner has two fold grievances. One for not taking any action in deciding the application for exemption from payment of rates and taxes made on 20th December, 1990 and also the legality and validity of two orders dated 7th September. 1990 making valuations of the building and property of the writ petitioner. At the threshold Mr. J. K. Mitra, learned senior counsel fairly submits that there is a formal defect in the writ petition as the office-bearer of the society/ writ petitioner has not been made a party herein and this should have been done under the provisions S. 19 of the West Bengal Society Registration Act, 1961 which has been Interpreted to be a mandatory one as has been observed in the judgment of the Division Bench reported in : AIR1977Cal437 . Mr. Mitra, however, submits that the aforesaid judgment of the Division Bench has not taken note of other two earlier decisions, one of which is of this Court : AIR1960Cal409 and anothe...
Tag this Judgment!S.T.P. Limited Vs. Second Labour Court and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-24-2002
Reported in: (2002)IILLJ594Cal
D.K. Seth, J. Facts: 1. A Scheme was floated for Voluntary Retirement (VRS for short), which is annexure "II" to this writ petition at page 21. This scheme was floated on November 4, 1981. In the scheme there were two categories. First category contained of those, who did not complete 25 years of service and the second category, who had completed more than 25 years of service. In respect of both the categories the gratuity was proposed to be paid in the same manner as quoted in Clause (4) of both the categories, one of which is quoted herein: "4. Gratuity shall be paid in the following manner: (i) For the period when the salary was lesser than Rs. 1,000/- @ 15 (Fifteen) days' salary (Basic plus DA) for each year of service as provided in the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 and ii) For the period when the salary was above Rs. 1,000/- @ 15 (Fifteen) days' salary of the last drawn salary (Basic plus DA) for each year of service as a special case and for the purpose of this V.R. Scheme only....
Tag this Judgment!Lakshman Kumar Mondal Vs. U. Co. Bank and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-24-2002
Reported in: 2004(1)CHN321,(2004)IILLJ614Cal
D.K. Seth, J. 1. The petitioner has challenged the departmental proceedings on the ground that the chargesheet could not be issued and no departmental proceeding could be initiated and proceeded with, in view of Clause 6.3 of the Manual on disciplinary action and related matters of UCO Bank read with Clause 2.1 thereof. According to the petitioner, a disciplinary proceeding starts with the issue of the chargesheet, as is laid down in Clause 2.1 of the Manual. As such, issue of chargesheet is a step for proceeding departmentally. In terms of Clause 6.3, a departmental proceeding cannot be proceeded against a dilinquent, if steps have been taken to prosecute an employee or get him prosecuted for an offence involving moral turpitude, unless he is put on trial within a year of commission of offence. According to the learned Counsel for the petitioner, the expression 'commission of offence' means the day when the commission of offence is brought to the notice of the prosecuting authority, n...
Tag this Judgment!Sabita Paul (Das) Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-22-2002
Reported in: (2002)1CALLT1(HC)
M.H.S. Ansart. J. 1. The background facts, in brief, leading to the filing of the writ application are as under; 2. One Smt. Bandana Das was an approved teacher of respondent school (Blmagar Shivkali Girls' High School. Birnagar, Dist. Nadia) and was granted leave for one year and thereby a leave vacancy occurred in the institution. The District Inspector of Schools (SE) granted prior permission for filing up the said leave vacancy (annexure 'P3'). In the said prior permission the nature of vacancy has been described as 'lien leave vacancy for one year with effect from September 27, 1995 to September 25, 1996'. Pursuant thereto an advertisement was published in newspapers and in response thereto petitioner applied for the post in question and appeared before the Selection Committee constituted for the said purpose. Thereafter, the panel prepared by the Selection Committee was submitted for approval and the DIS (SE) by his order dated March 1, 1996 (annexure P-7') accordedapproval to th...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »