Kolkata Court May 2002 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.
Shree Balaji Steels Vs. Gontermann-peipers (India) Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-15-2002
Reported in: [2003]114CompCas193(Cal),[2003]47SCL821(Cal)
Tarun Chatterjee, J.1. When some argument was advanced by learned counsel for the parties on the question of grant of interim relief, learned counsel for the parties suggested to us that instead of disposing of the application for grant of interim relief, the appeal itself could be taken up for hearing by treating the appeal on the date the application for grant of interim relief was taken up for hearing. Accordingly the appeal was taken up for hearing along with the application for grant of interim relief.2. This is an appeal from an order passed by a learned company judge of this court on February 6, 2002 in C. P. No. 41 of 2002 whereby and whereunder the petition for winding up filed at the instance of the petitioning creditor/appellant was admitted for a sum of Rs. 47,74,242. It appears from the impugned order also that the learned company judge gave liberty to the petitioning creditor/appellant to institute such proceedings as it may be advised to realise its alleged dues against ...
Howrah District Central Co-operative Bank Limited Employees' Union Vs. ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-15-2002
Reported in: [2002(95)FLR569],(2002)IIILLJ760Cal
Amitava Lala, J.1. This writ petition is made basically challenging the order of transfer issued, vide memo dated January 16/17, 2002, being annexure P-11 to the writ petition and also from altering the service conditions of the workmen/members of the petitioner, i.e., union, during the pendency of the conciliation proceeding before respondent No. 3. A further order is sought for declaring the impugned promotions as transfers made during the pendency of the conciliation proceedings are void ab initio.2. This writ petition has been filed on April 10, 2002, after a period of about three months from such order. It further appears to this Court from a communication dated February 19, 2002, under annexure P-13 to the writ petition that the Deputy Labour Commissioner, Howrah, has written to the concerned co-operative bank requesting them not to take any action that might stand in the way of maintaining a cordial atmosphere which is needed in resolving the dispute amicably. Thereafter, he cal...
Namita Chowdhury Vs. the State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-15-2002
Reported in: (2003)2CALLT63(HC)
P.K. Ray, J. 1. Heard learned advocates for the parties. 2. In this writ application, the petitioner has challenged the decision dated 1.7.96 of the District Inspector of Schools (SE). Uttar Dinajpur, whereby and whereunder the petitioner's prayer for approval of appointment with effect from 1.1.87 as organising teacher of the concerned school instead of 1.4.91 as granted, was rejected. 3. This writ application has a chequered career. The petitioner moved a writ application praying for approval of service as organising teacher of the concerned school with effect from the date of recognition of the school, that is 1.1.87, being C.O. No. 3908(W) of 1991 which was finally disposed of by the judgment and order dated 5.4.91 by Mahitosh Majumdar, J. which reads as follows: 'There is no dispute that the petitioner is an organising assistant teacher from the inception of the school and the name of the petitioner was duly recorded by the District Level Inspection Team by their report leading to...
Bireswar Sirkar Vs. Collector of Central Excise and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-15-2002
Reported in: (2003)2CALLT523(HC),2003(162)ELT1170(Cal)
A.K. Mathur, C.J.1. This is an appeal directed against the order dated 12th January, 1984 passed by the learned single Judge whereby the learned single Judge has dismissed the writ petition. The petitioner filed this writ petition before the learned single Judge challenging the show cause notice issued to the petitioner by the Collector of Central Excise and Customs, Calcutta and Orissa under Defence of India Rules.2. The petitioner carries on business as jeweller and manufacturer of and dealer in gold ornaments under the firm name and style of M/s. B. Sarkar (Johuri) as the sole proprietor thereof. The petitioner was served with a show cause notice on 9th February, 1967 by the Collector of Central Excise and Customs, Calcutta and Orissa to show cause why certain quantities of gold and gold ornaments as mentioned in the show cause notice, which have been seized from his premises No. 131B, Bepin Behari Ganguly Street, Calcutta, should not be confiscated under Rule 126M of the Defence of...
Timken India Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-14-2002
Reported in: [2002]256ITR460(Cal)
Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta, J.1. In this matter the point in the dispute is short, as to whether the petitioner-company is obliged to deduct income-tax at the rate of 30 per cent, or 20 per cent, from the amount of royalty paid by the writ petitioner to the American company under the provisions of the technical collaboration agreement.2. Briefly stated the facts of this case are that the writ petitioner No. 1 on March 20, 1990, entered into an agreement with an American company, viz., the Timken company, for acquisition and transfer of proprietary technical information in consideration of payment of a lump sum amount of Rs. 3,70,00,000 in a phased manner. Under the terms of the agreement a sum of Rs. 1,23,33,333 was to be paid within sixty days after the agreement is filed with the Reserve Bank of India and the capital goods clearance is obtained, and within 60 days from the date of transfer of delivery of technical documentation a sum of Rs. 1,23,33,333 and lastly a sum of Rs. 1,23,33,334 ...
Shibendra Narayan Roy Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-13-2002
Reported in: (2002)3CALLT527(HC)
A.K. Banerjee, J.1. The writ petitioner was a clerk in Barrackpore Municipality. He was entrusted to disburse pecuniary benefits to the retired employees of the municipality. From time to time he was entrusted with funds by the municipality for the said purpose,2. On a complain received by the municipality from one Rajendra Hari, claimant as the legal heir of Late Rashmani Hari, an ex-employee of the municipality to the effect that the pecuniary benefit was not being disbursed properly, the writ petitioner was charge sheeted by the municipality on 17th August, 1998. It was alleged that out of a sum of Rs. 3,88,346/- paid to the writ petitioner by the municipality a sum of Rs. 53,176/- was neither disbursed nor deposited with the cashier of the municipality. It was further revealed that a further sum of Rs. 57,237/- was also not disbursed by the writ petitioner and was kept in his custody. For non-deposit of the said sum of Rs. 57,237/- and Rs. 53,176/- and keeping the same in his perso...
Purna Chandra Ghorai and ors. Vs. the State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-13-2002
Reported in: (2003)1CALLT496(HC)
P.K. Ray, J. 1. Heard the learned advocate for all the parties.2. In this writ application, the petitioners who claim themselves as organising teaching staff of upgraded class IX and X, which has since been recognised by the decision of the West Bengal Board of Secondary Education with effect from 1.5.98, have challenged the decision dated 25.5.2000 passed by the District Inspector of Schools (SE) Tamluk, whereby and whereunder the petitioners prayer for approval of their services with effect from the date of recognition was rejected on different grounds including the grounds that as per the Government Circular No. 117-SE(S) dated 24.2.1995, the conditions as stipulated for according approval of the services of the organiser staff were not at all fulfilled.3. This writ application has been opposed by filing affidavit-in-opposition by the State respondents. However, this writ application has been supported by the Managing Committee of the school.4. It is the ease of the writ petitioners...
Sri Rajesh Chandra Ghosh Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-13-2002
Reported in: (2005)2CALLT44(HC)
Maharaj Sinha, J.1. This is an appeal against a judgment and order of a learned single Judge dated 20 December, 1991 passed in Civil Rule No. 4449 (W) of 1978.2. A writ application was moved way back in the year 1978, to be precise on 20 July, 1978, when a Rule was issued and an interim order made by His Lordship, Mr. Justice N.C. Mukherjee (as His Lordship then was). Eventually, the said writ application was heard on merits and thehrg was concluded on or about 11 June, 1985 and the judgment was delivered after a lapse of five and a half years thereafter, to be precise again, on 20 December, 1991.3. The facts and circumstances on the basis of which the said writ application was moved could thus be put in a short compass.4. In the month of February, 1971 newspaper advertisements were made inviting applications for a whole time permanent post of Deputy Superintendent and Remembrancer of Legal Affairs, West Bengal, shortly called Deputy Legal Remembrancer (commonly known as D.L.R. in lega...
Asstt. Cit Vs. Pallawi Resources Ltd.
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Decided on: May-11-2002
Reported in: (2004)86TTJ(Kol.)579
This appeal filed by the revenue, is directed against Commissioner (Appeals)'s order for the assessment year 1990-91. Solitary grievance of the revenue is that "on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, Commissioner (Appeals) erred in cancelling the penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, when the assessee itself has accepted the assessment order giving rise to the penalty order." The issue in this appeal lies in a narrow compass of undisputed facts.The assessee derives income inter alia from letting of building and a part of assessee's building was rented out to the Government of India.In the relevant previous year, rent payable by the Government of India was enhanced, with retrospective effect from 16-11-1985, and it was in this connection that the assessee received a sum of Rs. 10,96,737. The amount so received represented 80 per cent of the arrear rent from 16-11-1985 to 31-10-1989, and the balance amount of Rs. 2,96,628 was, as is the undisputed position i...
Octavius Steel and Co. Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Decided on: May-10-2002
Reported in: (2002)83ITD87(Kol.)
1. The Hon'ble President has constituted this Special Bench for deciding the following points : "1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and on a proper interpretation of Sections 2(47)(iv) and 45(2) of the Act, the assessee was rightly assessed to capital gains tax. on a sum of Rs. 3,92,850 2. Whether, the assessee is liable to the capital gains tax on the above sum notwithstanding that the conversion of the capital asset into stock-in-trade took place prior to 1st April, 1985, the date from which both the sections came into force?" 2. The facts involved in the present case are as follows. The assessee-company was holding a plot of leasehold land at 14 & 15, Old Court House Street, Kolkata. The land was held as investment. The middle portion of the land measuring 914 sq. mt. was transferred from the investment account and converted into assessee's stock-in-trade during the accounting year ended on 31st March, 1983. On conversion the market value of the land ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »