Kolkata Court August 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.
Calcutta Port Shramik Union and ors. Vs. Board of Trustees of Calcutta ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-09-2002
Reported in: (2002)IIILLJ1098Cal
D.K. Seth, J.Facts 1. In this writ petition, the Calcutta Port Shramik Union represented by its General Secretary, Parbati Das and Calcutta Port Officers' Federation represented by its General Secretary, Dipankar Ghosh had challenged the decision of the Calcutta Port Trust to roll back the retirement age from 60 years to 58 years.The facts of the case briefly are that originally the retirement age of Class I, Class II and Class III employees of the Calcutta Port Trust (CPT) was 55 years. Whereas the retirement age of Class IV employees was 60 years. By a Resolution dated September 30, 1963, the retirement age of the Class I, Class II and Class III employees were raised from 55 years to 58 years in order to maintain parity with the decision taken by the Central Government in respect of its employees at the material point of time. By a Resolution dated October 30, 1972, the retirement age of Class IV employees was reduced from 60 years to 58 years. The Fundamental Rules was amended by Fu...
Asoke Aikat Vs. State of W.B. and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-09-2002
Reported in: 2002(4)CHN730,[2003(97)FLR1080]
Debiprasad Sengupta, J.1. In the present application the petitioner has challenged Misc. Execution Case No. 16 of 2000 under Section 33-C of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 as amended by Section 18 of the Industrial Disputes (W.B. 2nd Amendment) Act, 1980 now pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Burdwan.2. In terms of Order No. 382-IR dated 28.2.2000 passed by the Assistant Secretary to the Government of W.B., the Deputy Labour Commissioner, Burdwan lodged a complaint with a prayer for initiating a proceeding for recovery of the amount of Rs. 6,65,809. 25 due to the workmen, before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Burdwan which was registered as Misc. Execution Case No. 16/2000. On receipt of such complaint the learned Magistrate took cognizance of the offence and directed summons to be issued upon the petitioner fixing 2.6.2000 for further order and payment. On 2.6.2000 the matter was adjourned and thereafter by an order dated 12.7.2000 the learned Magist...
Mountview Exports Pvt. Ltd. and anr. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax an ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-08-2002
Reported in: (2002)178CTR(Cal)517,[2002]258ITR46(Cal)
M.H.S. Ansari, J.1. The petitioner-assessee has, in the instant writ application, inter alia, questioned the order dated September 12, 2001, passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax, Central-II (for short 'the CIT'), being annexure P-15 whereby and whereunder the application filed by the petitioner under Section 80HHC(2)(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, has been rejected and prayed for consequential orders in that behalf. The petitioners have also prayed for certain other reliefs.2. The order sheet dated July 8, 2002, shows that Mr. D.K. Shome, learned counsel appearing along with Md. Nizamuddin, advocate, for the respondent-tax authorities, submitted that the writ application can be heard without affidavit-in-opposition. The impugned order, it was submitted by Mr. Shome, can be sustained on the facts and for the reasons contained therein.3. The main question for consideration in the instant writ application is whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, petitioner No. 1 is ent...
Peerless General Finance and Investment Co. Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commission ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-08-2002
Reported in: (2003)180CTR(Cal)195,[2002]258ITR160(Cal)
Barin Ghosh, J.1. These writ petitions were heard analogously inasmuch as the facts relating thereto and law applicable in relation to the same are almost identical. The subject-matter of challenge in C.O. No. 4959(W) of 1989 is the notice dated March 28, 1989, issued under Section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the said Act'), for the purpose of reopening the assessment for the assessment year 1981-82.2. In C. O. No. 4960(W) of 1989 the subject matter of challenge is a similar notice dated March 28, 1969, for reopening the assessment for the assessment year 1980-81.3. In C. O. No. 4961(W) of 1989 the subject matter of challenge is a similar notice also dated March 28, 1989, for reopening the assessment for the assessment year 1973-74.4. The grounds upon which power under Section 148 of the said Act has been exercised are identical and the same are as follows :'THE PEERLESS GENERAL FINANCE AND INVESTMENT Co. lTD. Reasons for issuing notices under Section ...
Gemini Silk Limited Vs. Gemini Overseas Limited
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-08-2002
Reported in: [2003]53CLA328(Cal)
ORDER(1) That all the property, rights and powers of the transferor company specified in the first, second and third parties of the Schedule hereto and all other property, rights and powers of the transferor company be transferred without further act or deed to the transferee company and accordingly the same shall pursuant to Section 394(2) of the Companies Act, 1956 be transferred to and vest in the transferee company for all the estate and interest of the transferor company therein but subject nevertheless to all charges now affecting the same other than (here set out any charges which by virtue of the compromise or arrangement are to cease to have effect): and(2) That all the liabilities and duties of the transferor company be transferred without further act or deed to the transferee company and accordingly the same shall, pursuant to Section 394(2) of the Companies Act, 1956 be transferred to and become the liabilities and duties of the transferee company; and(3) That all proceedin...
Surendra Kumar Jalan and ors. Vs. Calcutta Municipal Corporation and o ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-08-2002
Reported in: AIR2002Cal237
ORDERBhaskar Bhattacharya, J.1. By this writ application the writ petitioners, some of the owners of Bardan Market, have prayed for direction upon the Calcutta Municipal Corporation to dispose of the application for review filed under Section 192 of the Calcutta Municipal Corporation Act, 1980 ('Act').2. The following facts are not in dispute.A notice under Section 184(3) of the Act was served upon the petitioners proposing enhancement of annual valuation of their respective shops. Pursuant to such notice, the petitioners filed written objection disputing the proposed annual valuation and ultimately the Hearing Officer-III passed an order determining fresh annual valuation.3. Being dissatisfied, the petitioners preferred appeal before the Municipal Assessment Tribunal but for non-compliance with the necessity of law of depositing current amount at the enhanced rate as provided in Section 189(6) of the Act, the appeal was not disposed of on merit and the same abated. Subsequently, the p...
Lakhi Ram Gawala Vs. the State
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-08-2002
Reported in: (2003)2CALLT315(HC)
P.K. Biswas, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order of conviction for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 3000/- i.d. to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a further period of 6 months passed by Shri M.M. Sarkar, the learned Sessions Judge, A&N; Islands, Port Blair in Sessions Case No. 10 of 2001 against the convict/appellant Lakhi Ram Gawala.2. The short facts leading to the prosecution of the present convict/ appellant are as under:One Smt. Lalita Kumari, daughter of the present convict/appellant came to the Police Station and narrated the information before the police which was reduced into writing and after the writing was made complete the same was read over and explained to her and thereafter she put her signature on the same after being satisfied that the same was correctly written.3. In the First Information Report it was alleged that the defacto-complainant then aged about 12 years, alongwith her brothers used to reside with their parents in their house at Hutbay ...
Mahendra JaIn Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-08-2002
Reported in: 2003CriLJ1464,2003(89)ECC862,2003(156)ELT193(Cal)
ORDERAmitava Lala, J.1. The first writ petition is made by a Director of the company known as M/s. CEE AN INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED. According to him, on 12th February, 2002 at 12.30 p.m. some persons disclosed their identity as Officers of Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, Calcutta Zonal Unit raided the office and searched the office premises. Since nothing was found after such search a list was handed over with the note 'Nil'. On the same day search was also conducted at the residence of the petitioner and when again nothing was found there, the similar search list with the remark 'Nil' was handed over. The petitioner was directed to appear in the Zonal Unit on the same day in connection with the enquiry relating to import of one M/s. Chessman Impex Private Limited. A summon was also served on the same day i.e. 12th February, 2002. The petitioner contended that he has got nothing to do in respect of the named company for which search was conducted and summon was issued. The di...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Window Glass Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-06-2002
Reported in: (2003)179CTR(Cal)602
ORDER1. This is a petition of appeal by the Revenue under Section 260A. The appeal is intended to be filed in respect of a sum of Rs. 11.41 lakh, representing interest paid by the assessee in respect of business loans taken by it from the bank, deduction having been claimed therefor in the return.2. The assessee has been successful both at the appellate stage and before the Tribunal. The assessee was unsuccessful before the AO who did not accept the assessee's argument about interest-free loans given to its subsidiary M/s Croton Trading Ltd. The reasoning of the AO was that because interest-free loan has been given by the assessee to its subsidiary, the assessee should not be entitled to deduct interest paid by itself to the bank. The argument made by the assessee that the interest-free loan was given by it to its subsidiary out of funds other than borrowed funds did not cut any ice with the AO.3. We take note that almost in similar circumstances, for an earlier assessment year, viz. 1...
Rabi Kumar Agarwal Vs. State of W.B.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-06-2002
Reported in: 2003CriLJ1342
ORDERMalay Kumar Basu, J.1. This revisional application is directed against the order dated 30th August, 1944 passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 17th Court, Calcutta in G.R. Case No. 1282/85 (T.R. 82/87) under which he framed charge against the accused persons of that case (the present petitioner Ravi Kumar Agarwal being one of them) under Sections 457, 380 and 120-B of the IPC'. being aggrieved by this order the accused Ravi Kumar Agarwal, the present petitioner has preferred this revisional application challenging the said order as illegal and unsustainable.2. Mr. Roy, learned Advocate for the petitioner has contended that the learned Magistrate overlooked the fact that the prosecution had failed prima facie to prove that the de facto complainant was in possession of the disputed room or the disputed furnitures and fixtures thereof at the relevant time and unless this major ingredient of offence of theft is prima facie proved the charge under Sections 380 and 467 cannot b...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »