Kolkata Court June 2005 Judgments
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Britannia Industries Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-30-2005
Reported in: (2005)198CTR(Cal)426,[2006]280ITR525(Cal)
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 given for the purpose of business ignoring the fact that the condition as laid down under the provision of Section 36(1)(iii) of the IT Act were not fulfilled ?'1.1 In the facts and circumstances of the case, this question has two aspects. One is related to the transaction between the assessee and the firm alleged to be a firm of relatives, which might have some impact on the transaction. In case we find that it is not a firm of relatives, the answer would be simple and would not assume a different complexion, as it would have if the firm is found to be a firm of relatives. The other question requires to be examined in this context is that whether this interest-free advances were given for the purpose of business entitling the assessee to the benefit of Section 36(1)(iii) of the...
Tag this Judgment!Asis Bose Vs. State of West Bengal and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-30-2005
Reported in: 2005(4)CHN536
Subhro Kamal Mukherjee, J.1. This is an application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against an order passed by the learned District Judge at Cooch Behar in Misc. Appeal No. 2 of 2004. The appeal was filed against an order of confiscation dated January 12, 2004 in respect of a pick-up van bearing registration No. WB-69/ 1490.2. It is alleged that on June 23, 2003 it was found that the said pick-up van was carrying some teak block timbers without any transit pass. The vehicle was intercepted and was, ultimately, seized.3. Although various testimonies were taken, but it was found b y the Tribunal below, as findings of fact, that the owner or the driver of the offending vehicle had no authority to carry the confiscated timbers. Therefore, the authorised officer directed confiscation of the vehicle as the vehicle was involved with an offence of carrying unauthorised forest produce.4. The learned District Judge affirmed the order of the authorised officer, Divisional Forest Of...
Tag this Judgment!Bidyut Kumar Karak @ Bidyut Karak Vs. State of West Bengal and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-30-2005
Reported in: 2006(2)CHN311
Sadhan Kumar Gupta, J.1. This revisional application has been filed under Section 401 read with Section 482 of the Cr.PC against the order dated 09.07.2003 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, 3rd Court, Bishnupur, District-Bankura in G.R. Case No. 38 of 2003 arising out of Joypur Case No. 5 of 2000 under Section 279/ 304A IPC. Case of the petitioner is that, the abovementioned criminal case was started on the basis of the written complaint submitted by one Pirupada Dey on 22.02.2000 stating therein that his brother-in-law Hari Nandi was travelling by S.B.S.T.C. bus bearing No. WB-39-3604. Said Hari Nandi was travelling on the roof of the bus and in so doing, he received injury on his head by a branch of a tree and he was sent to Joypur Primary Health Centre for treatment by the public. Subsequently, he was transferred to Bishnupur Hospital and from there to the P.G. Hospital, Kolkata where he expired on 26.7.2003. It has been alleged in the written complaint that due to the rash...
Tag this Judgment!Tailakshya Das and anr. Vs. State of West Bengal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-29-2005
Reported in: 2005(4)CHN464
Debiprasad Sengupta, J.1. This appeal is preferred against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 13th July, 2000 passed by the Id. Additional Sessions Judge, 2nd Court, Nadia in Sessions Case No. 33(2)2000 [Sessions Trial No. IV(June) 2000] thereby convicting the accused appellants under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing each of them to suffer imprisonment for life.2. The prosecution case, in short, is that on the basis of an information lodged by one Shyarnal Das (P.W.1) a case was registered with Chapra P.S. alleging commission of offence under Section 302/34 IPC, wherein it was alleged that on 20.6.99 at about 6 p.m. when his cousin Biswanath was proceeding along the village path and when he arrived near the house of accused appellant No. 1 Tailakshya, he was attacked by both the appellants namely Tailakshya and his brother Kartick. Both the appellants being armed with 'Chip Dao' came out from the house of appellant No. 1 and started hitting Bi...
Tag this Judgment!Gopal Sidhya Vs. State of West Bengal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-29-2005
Reported in: (2005)3CALLT172(HC)
Arun Kumar Bhattacharya, J.1. The hearing stems from an appeal preferred against the Judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed by the learned Judge, Special Court-cum-Additional Sessions Judge, Cooch Behar in Sessions Case No. 38/94 on 24.08.1999.2. The Prosecution case, in brief, in that on 07.10.1992 at about 9.30 p.m. on receipt of an information from the public, the defacto complainant (P.W. 1) had been to the P.O., found and came to learn that at about 9.15 p.m. while his brother-in-law Dwijendra Nath Roy was returning to house after viewing a video show, on the way he .was attacked and assaulted by accused Gopal Sidhya and his two brothers accused Sunil Sidhya and Anil Sidhya with a spear due to previous grudge thereby causing his death in front of the house of said Gopal. Hence, all the three accused persons were charged under Section 302/34 IPC.3. The defence case, as suggested to P.Ws and as contended by the accused persons during their examination under Section 313...
Tag this Judgment!Uma Devi Khanna and anr. Vs. Ava Rani Das
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-28-2005
Reported in: 2005(3)CHN358
Bhaskar Bhattacharya, J.1. This appeal is at the instance of tenant-defendants in a suit for eviction and is directed against the judgment and decree dated September 5, 1994 passed by the learned Judge, 5th Bench, City Civil Court at Calcutta in Ejectment Suit No. 1066 of 1986 thereby passing a decree for eviction against the appellants on the grounds of reasonable requirement, violation of clauses (m), (o) and (p) of Section 108 of the Transfer of Property Act and also on the ground of sub-letting.2. The plaintiff-respondent filed the aforesaid suit against the appellants alleging that the appellants were monthly tenants under her in respect of the suit property at the monthly rental of Rs. 80/- payable according to the English calendar month. According to the plaintiff, the defendants committed default in payment; of rent, sublet the property in favour of one Raju Kapoor, and committed acts contrary to the provisions of clauses (m), (o) and (p) of Section 108 of the Transfer of Prope...
Tag this Judgment!SudIn Kumar Chatterjee Vs. Impetus Engineering Pvt. Ltd. and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-28-2005
Reported in: 2005(3)CHN587
Bhaskar Bhattacharya, J.1. This appeal is at the instance of a plaintiff in a suit for recovery of unpaid fees and remuneration of a whole-time Director and also for permanent injunction and is directed against the judgment and decree dated 11th August, 2003 passed by the learned Judge, 9th Bench, City Civil Court at Calcutta in Money Suit No. 513 of 1999 thereby holding that the suit was not maintainable before the City Civil Court at Calcutta.2. The appellant filed the aforesaid suit thereby claiming the following relief:(a) A decree for Rs. 78,000/- (Seventy-eight thousand only) against the defendants on account of the fees and remuneration of Rs. 6,500/- per month as unpaid for the period of August, 1998 to July, 1999 as given in Schedule 'A' below;(b) A decree for permanent injunction restraining the defendants or their men, agents, servants and/ assigns and/or directions from taking forcible decisions the plaintiff is not legally entitled to get the fees and remuneration totallin...
Tag this Judgment!Swahom Shipping Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Cus.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-28-2005
Reported in: 2005(190)ELT436(Cal)
Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta, J.1. By this writ application, the petitioners have prayed for writ of mandamus directing the respondents to destuff two containers Nos. VMLU 330004 and VMLU 3304430 which contained 430 bags of Damarbatu weighing 30,000 Kgs and to deliver the said two containers after destuffing, refund of a sum of Rs. 1,29,267/- realized by the Port on account of demurrage charges in relation to the said two containers and further not to charge any demurrage charges in relation to the said two containers. The short fact of the case which led to filing of this application is stated hereunder :First petitioner claims to be the agent of one M/s. Vasco Maritime Private Ltd., a Singapore based Company. This Company is a non-vessel operator container carrier. On or about 13th November, 2001, a consignment consisting of 430 bags of Damarbatu weighing as mentioned above arrived at the Port of Calcutta per vessel M.V. Cambodia Star in the above two containers. The said consignment was sh...
Tag this Judgment!Alloy Steel Rolling Mills Vs. West Bengal Pollution Control Board and ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-28-2005
Reported in: AIR2006Cal75,2005(4)CHN650
Asok Kumar Ganguly, J. 1. This writ petition has been filed challenging an order dated 23rd March, 2004 passed by the Pollution Control Appellate Authority, West Bengal (hereinafter called Authority).2. By the said order, the appeal of the writ petitioner was dismissed and the writ petitioner was directed to change over within four months from the coal fired system to the cleaner fuel system of either oil or gas. The appeal before the authority was directed against an order dated 31st August, 2001 passed by the Senior Environmental Engineer of the West Bengal Pollution Control Board (hereinafter called 'the Board').3. From the Board's order dated 31st August, 2001 it appears that while the Board was monitoring air quality in Kolkata and its metropolitan area for sometime, it became imperative for the Board to take step for improvement of the air quality. The Board accordingly decided that no coal fired rolling mill will operate within the metropolis of Kolkata and such mills should ope...
Tag this Judgment!Dalgaon Agro Industries Ltd. (Now Known as Tasati Tea Ltd.) Vs. Union ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-24-2005
Reported in: (2006)1CALLT32(HC),2005(3)CHN428,[2006(108)FLR545],(2005)IIILLJ356Cal
D.K. Seth, J.The Background:1. These two matters have since been referred to this larger Bench on the basis of an order dated 14th November, 2003 passed in WP 16037(W) of 2003. The learned Single Judge differed with the decisions of this Court passed in three other matters by three other learned Single Judges respectively. The learned Fourth Judge, therefore, was of the opinion that a larger Bench should be constituted. On the other hand an appeal was taken against the judgment dated 21st March, 2003 passed by one of the learned Single Judge in CR No. 11160(W) of 1984. This appeal was being heard by a Division Bench consisting of one of us (D.K. Seth, J.) and Hon'ble R.N. Sinha, J. On 19th July, 2004 Mr. Bikash Ranjan Bhattacharya, learned Counsel for the respondent, brought to the notice of the said Division Bench that identical point had since been referred to a larger Bench. Therefore by an order dated 19th July, 2004 the matter was released from being heard in part by the said Divi...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »