Kolkata Court February 2014 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.
M/S. Humcha Impex Private Limited and anr. Vs. the Commissioner of Cen ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-18-2014
ORDER SHEET W.P.No.119 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE M/S.HUMCHA IMPEX PRIVATE LIMITED AND ANR. Versus THE COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, HALDIA COMMISSIONERATE & ANR. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE HARISH TANDON Date : 18th February, 2014. Appearance : Mr.V.N.Dwiyedi, Adv.Mr.Sourav Bagaria, Adv. for the petitioners Mr.S.B. Saraf, Adv.Mr.K.K. Maity, Adv. for the Central Excise The Court : The petitioner submits that his remission application has been disposed of by the authority without affording an opportunity of hearing. It is further submitted that the proceeding initiated on the basis of the show-cause notices were taken up together and were disposed of by an original order dated 30.03.2012 wherein recording is also made that the remission application is also decided. The petitioner says that the remission application is an independent proceeding and was not connected with the aforesaid proceedings initiated on the basis of the s...
Rajendra Kumar JaIn @ Lunia and anr Vs. K.M.C. and ors
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-18-2014
ORDER SHEET W.P.No.113 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE RAJENDRA KUMAR JAIN @ LUNIA & ANR Versus K.M.C.AND ORS BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMITRA PAL Date : 18th February, 2014. Appearance : Mr.P.S.Sengupta,Advocate Mr.S.Singhvi,Advocate Mr.Kishore Dutta,Advocate Mr.A.Chattopadhyay,Advocate Mr.R.C.Sanyal,Advocate Arindam Banerjee,Advocate Mr.Barin Banerjee,Advocate Mr.D.Mondal,Advocate Mr.S.S.Ghoshal,Advocate The Court : Affidavit of service filed in Court today be kept on record. Let affidavit in opposition to the writ petition be filed by 21st March, 2014. Reply thereto, if any, be filed by 28th March, 2014. So far as the prayer for interim order is concerned, it is submitted by Mr.Sengupta, learned advocate for the petitioner that since the right of his client over the common space crystalised by the order dated 30th October, 1979 passed by the Deputy Secretary, Government of West Bengal, Department of Housing, the Appellate Auth...
M/S. Concast Steel and Power Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, ...
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-18-2014
Dr. D.M. Misra, J. 1. Vide Order No.SO/71456/2013 dated 09.12.2013 this Tribunal has directed the Applicant to deposit Rs.40.00 Lakhs within a period of eight weeks and report compliance on 18.02.2014. The order was pronounced in the presence of the Advocate for the Applicant and also dispatched to the Applicant on 26.12.2013, which has not been returned as not served. 2. The Ld.A.R. for the Revenue submits that that the Applicant had not complied with the direction of pre-deposit and prayed that their Appeal be dismissed for non-compliance. 3. We find that the Applicant had not complied with the direction of pre-deposit order dated 09.12.2013. Accordingly their Appeal is dismissed for non-compliance with the provisions of Section 35F as applicable to Service Tax cases by virtue of Section 83 of Finance Act, 1994....
Humcha Impex Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Universal Sompo General Insurance Company L ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-17-2014
ORDER SHEET AP No.493 of 2013 GA No.77 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE HUMCHA IMPEX PVT.LTD.-VersusUNIVERSAL SOMPO GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED Appearance: Mr.V.N.Dwivedi, Adv...for the petitioner. Mr.Hirak Mitra, Sr.Adv.Mr.Pradyumna Sinha, Adv...for the respondent. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SANJIB BANERJEE Date : 17th February, 2014. The Court : Sufficient grounds have been made out as to why the petitioner was not represented on January 6, 2014, when AP No.493 of 2013 was dismissed for default. The order dated January 6, 2014 is recalled and AP No.493 of 2013 is restored to the file. The restoration application, GA No.77 of 2014, is allowed as above without any order as to costs. Since the parties had been given previous notice, AP No.493 of 2013 is immediately taken up. The petitioner seeks the reference of the perceived disputes covered by the arbitration clause contained in an insurance contract. The insurance company...
Mahabir Tea Estate Pvt. Ltd. and ors. Vs. Dr. Saibal Choudhury and ors ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-17-2014
ORDER SHEET APO No.27 of 2014 ACO No.15 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Civil Appellate Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE MAHABIR TEA ESTATE PVT.LTD.& ORS.Versus DR. SAIBAL CHOUDHURY & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE PATHERYA Date : 17th February, 2014. Mr.Ratnanko Banerjee, Mr.D.N.Sharma, Adversus for the appellant Mr.Pramit Roy, Mr.Rupak Ghosh, Mr.S.Sinha Roy, Adversus for the respondents The Court : This appeal though filed from the order dated 4th December, 2013 whereby the status quo in respect of the shareholding pattern which was passed order dated 14th February, 2013 has been continued. It has been submitted on behalf of the appellant that there is no restriction in the Article of Association for transfer of shares. The Article of Association is very categorical and clear that the shares can be transferred with the consent of the Board of DirectORS.Therefore the Company Law Board could not have passed an order of status quo in respect of shareholding when there is no restriction...
M/S. Sree Ram Construction Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-17-2014
AP No.1122 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction M/S.SREE RAM CONSTRUCTION Versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SANJIB BANERJEE Date : 17th February, 2014. Appearance: Mr.B.B. Sarkar, Adv.Ms.Iti Dutta, Adv.Mr.Debanjan Dutta, Adv.The Court : There is no dispute between the parties as to the existence of the arbitration agreement or as to the existence of live disputes between the parties which are covered by the arbitration agreement. The respondents say that the respondents did not receive the letter of invocation of August 2, 2013 prior to the petition being filed and immediately upon receipt of a copy of the petition the appointing authority has appointed an arbitrator. The respondents cannot, however, refute the evidence presented on behalf of the petitioner that the letter of invocation was received in the office of the respondents from the postal authorities on August 5, 2013. The petitioner has relied on the tracking report ...
Sagar Dutta Vs. Commissioner of Incometax, Kolkata and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-17-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Special Jurisdiction (Income-tax) Original Side Present : The Honble Justice Girish Chandra Gupta And The Honble Justice Sudip Ahluwalia February 17, 2014 GA3223of 2013 ITAT176of 2013 With ITA150of 2009 Sagar Dutta versus Commissioner of Income-tax, Kolkata & Anr. Mr.R.K.Biswas, Advocate for the appellant Mr.P.K.Bhowmik, Advocate of ITA150of 2009 Mr.Ranjan Sinha, Advocate of ITAT176of 2013 The Court :- Both these two appeals were taken up together because the common questions of law have arisen in these two appeals. The appellant, Amal Ganguly, was served with a notice to show cause why penalty under Section 271B shall not be imposed upon him. To be precise the relevant portion of the show cause notice reads as follows :Assessee filed I.T.Return on 04.03.2004 declaring a total income of 2,95,51,989. Assessment u/s.143(3) and assesxsed income is Rs.2,95,56,860/-.Scrutiny of records revealed that the total income of the assessee had included on income from p...
RobIn Paul Vs. the Official Liquidator
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-17-2014
ORDER SHEET CA No.36 of 2014 With CP No.324 of 2001 CA No.173 of 2008 CA No.293 of 2004 CA No.314 of 2008 CA No.419 of 2006 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Original Jurisdiction IN THE MATTER OF: NEW RED BANK TEA Co.PVT.LTD.(IN LIQN.) AND ROBIN PAUL VS THE OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE PATHERYA Date : 17th February, 2014. Mr.P.C.Sen, Sr.Advocate, Mr.A.Mitra for the petitioner. Mr.M.C. Ghose, Mrs.Mithua Sen for the Official Liquidator. The Court : In the order dated 15th March, 2011 it has been recorded that advertisements had been issued by the Official Lqiudaitor inviting claiMs.Some claims had been received and adjudicated upon. On adjudication of the said claims by the Official Liquidator payments have been made by the Special Officer. Thereafter no claim has been received by the Official Liquidator. Therefore, it stands to reason that there are no other unsecured creditors of the company. A secured creditor viz. United Bank of India has lodged a claim on account of ...
Solvex Properties and Services Pvt. Ltd. and anr. Vs. Employees Provid ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-17-2014
ORDER SHEET WP No.864 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE SOLVEX PROPERTIES AND SERVICES PVT.LTD.& ANR. Versus EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANISATION & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMEN SEN Date : 17th February, 2014. Appearance: Mr.Srenik Singhvi, Adv.Ms.Sananda Ganguly, Adv.Ms.Payel Bhattacharya, Adv.Mr.Sudip Kumar, Adv.The Court : Mr.Srenik Singhvi, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the impugned order is not sustainable, in view of the fact that the establishment of the petitioner is not covered under the Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Act, 1952. It is, however, submitted that the impugned order has proceeded on the basis of an inspection report, a copy whereof has not been made available to the petitioner. Mr.Singhvi has referred to the Notification of 2007, in which the word condominium was included and it is submitted that on the face of what has been stated in the impugned notice, t...
Commissioner of Income Tax, Kolkataii Vs. M/S. Karam Chand Thapar and ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-17-2014
ORDER SHEET ITAT No.205 of 2013 G.A.No.3751 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Special Jurisdiction (Income Tax) ORIGINAL SIDE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA-II Versus M/S.KARAM CHAND THAPAR & BROS. (COAL SALES) LTD BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE GIRISH CHANDRA GUPTA The Hon'ble JUSTICE SUDIP AHLUWALIA Date : 17th February, 2014. Mr P.K.Bhowmick, Advocate for the Appellant Mr.R.K.Murarka, Sr.Adv.for the Respondent The Court : The assessee is in the business of construction of daMs.tunnels etc.As against a gross contract realization of Rs.86,37,03,906/-, a sum of Rs.4,50,86,996/- was claimed to have been spent in transport charges. The Assessing Officer was of the view that the transport charges claimed by the assessee were much too high and he, therefore, computed the transport charges at the rate of 3.785% of the total realization which worked out to a sum of Rs.3,26,91,193/-. In the process, a sum of Rs.1,23,95,803/- was disallowed under the head transport charges and added back...
- ‹ Prev
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 20
- Next ›
- Last »