Kolkata Court May 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.
Deepak Kumar Prahladka Vs. Ananya Chatterjee Chakraborti and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-02-2014
GA No.1294 of 2014 With CS No.94 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE DEEPAK KUMAR PRAHLADKA Versus ANANYA CHATTERJEE CHAKRABORTI & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMEN SEN Date : 2nd May, 2014. Appearance: Mr.Deepak Kr. Prahladka, (In person) Mr.S.Mitra, Adv.Ms.S.Parveen, Adv.For defendant nos.1 & 2 Mr.A.Mondal, Adv.for defendant no.5 Ms.Sutapa Sanya, Adv.Ms.Saswati Chatterjee, Adv.for defendant no.6. The Court : The plaintiff has filed an application for striking out of defence of the defendant nos.1, 2, 5 and 6 for non-compliance of the order dated 11th February, 2014. The learned counsel for the defendant no.5 submits that after service of the application affirmed on 21st April, 2014, the said defendant no.5 has affirmed an affidavit of documents on 29th of April, 2014 and prays for extension of time for such affidavit of documents. It, however, remains unexplained as to why no extension of time was obtained before this applicat...
M/S. Eximpo Tea Limited Vs. Anita Bhalotia
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-02-2014
1 ORDER SHEET APO No.50 of 2014 CP No.298 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Civil Appellate Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE M/S.EXIMPO TEA LIMITED Versus ANITA BHALOTIA BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE BANERJEE The Hon'ble JUSTICE ARIJIT BANERJEE Date : 2nd May, 2014. Appearance: Mr.Surajit Nath Mitra, Sr.Advocate with Ms.Sucharita Biswas and Mr.D.Gupta, Ld. Advocates for the appellant. Mr.Sujoy Mukherjee, Mr.Kinjal Boral and Ms.P.Das, ld. Advocates For the respondent. The Court :- This appeal would relate to unpaid price of coal for which the respondent initiated a winding up proceeding. The learned Single Judge admitted the winding up petition for Rs.5.51 lac. Hence this appeal at the instance of the Company. The facts would depict, the respondent was the proprietor of the Coal supply agency that was being managed by one Mr.Bhalotia, the husband of the respondent. Parties had diveRs.transactions for a long time. There were supplies and simultaneous payments. The dispute arose in 2012 when ...
Joydeb Ghatak Vs. the Railway Protection Force,
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-02-2014
WP No.121 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE JOYDEB GHATAK Versus THE RAILWAY PROTECTION FORCE, EASTERN RAILWAY & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SANJIB BANERJEE Date : 2nd May, 2014. Appearance: Mr.Anjan Bhattacharya, Adv..for the petitioner Mr.Ashoke Chakraborty, Sr.Adv.Mr.Arindam Chattopadhyay, Adv..for the respondents The Court : The petitioner, who retired as an Assistant Security Commandant in the Railway Protection Force in April, 2013, seeks a direction on the railway authorities for the payment of the subsistence allowance that the petitioner ought to have received during the period that he remained suspended and for his gratuity which, according to him, has been wrongfully withheld. The respondents say that serious charges were levelled against the petitioner and a Central Bureau of Investigation criminal case was instituted against him, inter alia, under the provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1973. The petitioner...
Appellant Vs. Respondent
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-02-2014
ORDER SHEET CA No.578 of 2013 With CP No.289 of 2009 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Original Jurisdiction IN THE MATTER OF: CARRITT MORAN & CO.PVT.LTD.(IN LIQN.) BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE PATHERYA Date : 2nd May, 2014. MRS.Ruma Sikdar appears for Official Liquidator. Mr.S.K. Donraj, managing partner of the judgment debtor appeaRs.The Court : This day Mr.S.K. Donraj, managing partner of the judgment debtor has appeared and is desirous of making payment of the decretal dues. Till date a sum of Rs.12 lakhs is due and payable on account of arrears by the judgment debtor to the company (in liquidation).Accordingly, let a sum of Rs.6 lakhs be paid by the judgment debtor to the Official Liquidator who is now in control and management of the affairs of the company (in liquidation) by 15th May, 2014.The balance sum of Rs.6 lakhs on account of arrears be cleared by payment of Rs.1 lakh per month over a period of eight months, Rs.75,000/- be adjusted towards arrears and Rs.25,000/- towards curre...
Tsai Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. (In Liqn.) Vs. the Official Liquidator
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-02-2014
ORDER SHEET CA No.203 of 2013 CP No.392 of 2010 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Original Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE TSAI ENTERPRISES PVT.LTD.(IN LIQN.) Versus THE OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR AND PRAATIP KUMAR SEN & ANR. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE PATHERYA Date : 2nd May, 2014. Mr.Sarvapriya Mukherjee, Adv., Mr.S.Ghosh, Adv with Ms.Priyanka Pattanyak, Adv..for the Director, Matelli Tea Co.PVT.LTD.Mr.Indranil Ray, Adv.with Ms Aditi Bhattacharya, Adv..for accused no.1. Mr.Aniraban Kar, Adv..for accused no.2. Mr.B.Mohanty, Adv..for the Official Liquidator. THE COURT :-The statement of affairs was required to be filed by the Ex.-Director of the company (in liquidation).Statement of affairs has been filed by Mr.P.K.Sen, accused no.1 which is in complete. Accordingly, Mr.Sen is directed to file a complete statement of affairs within one week from date. The accused no.2 is represented through Counsel, who submits that he submitted his resignation on 12-03-2009. No form No.32 was filed by the company wi...
M/S. Naihati Jute Mills Company Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excis ...
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Kolkata
Decided on: May-02-2014
Dr. D. M. Misra, J. 1. This is an application for waiver of cenvat credit of Rs.5,00,855/- and equal amount of penalty imposed under Rule 57U (6) of the erstwhile Central Excise Rules, 1944. 2. At the outset, the ld. Advocate appearing for the Applicant, has submitted that the issue relates to availment of modvat credit during the period from August, 1995 to February, 1997 on various capital goods. He submits that they have availed modvat credit on the said capital goods in accordance with the law and under Rule 57Q of the erstwhile Central Excise Rules, 1944. He submits that the Department has proposed to deny the modvat credit on such capital goods on the ground that in view of the sub-rule (5) of Rule 57R, the value being shown as revenue expenditure in their books of accounts, therefore, they would not be eligible for modvat credit on such capital goods. He submits that this Rule has been amended twice, initially, sub-rule (5) has been amended on 23.07.1996 incorporating there...
M/S. Kirloskar Brothers Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise and Se ...
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Kolkata
Decided on: May-01-2014
Dr. D.M. Misra, J. 1. This is an Application seeking waiver of pre-deposit of Service Tax of Rs.4.78 Crores and equal amount of penalty imposed under Section 78 and penalty under Section 76 of Finance Act, 1994. 2. At the outset Shri J.P.Khaitan, Ld.Sr.Advocate for the Applicant submits that during the period from October, 2004 to March, 2008, the Appellant had rendered services to M/s.NTPC against three contracts. Broadly, the said contracts relate to supply of imported/indigenous material and supply of services. It is his submission that the supply of services, could also be bifurcated, namely, installation and commissioning services and civil construction services. He submits that on the basis of a letter dated 23.11.2011 by M/s.NTPC during the course of adjudication proceeding, copy of which was not handed over to them, the Ld.Commissioner had concluded that the entire amount of Rs.52,15,40,000/- related to installation services only and there were no civil construction services re...
M/S. Parag Enterprises Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Jamshedpur
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Kolkata
Decided on: May-01-2014
Dr. D.M. Misra, J. 1. Vide Order No.SO/71464/2013 dated 10.12.2013 this Tribunal directed the Applicant, after hearing their Counsel to deposit 25% of the Service Tax confirmed within a period of eight weeks and report compliance on 18.02.2014. On 18.02.2014 the matter was adjourned to 19.03.2014. On 19.03.2014 the proprietor of the Applicant company Shri Pankaj Singh appeared and sought time up to today to report compliance. 2. None appeared today nor there is any report of compliance. 3. The Ld.A.R. for the Revenue submits that in absence of compliance of the direction of pre-deposit, the Appeal is liable for dismissal. 4. Since the Applicant has failed to comply with the direction of pre-deposit dated 10.12.2013 in spite of repeated adjournments, their Appeal is dismissed for non-compliance with the provisions of Section 35F of Central Excise Act, 1944 as made applicable to Service Tax cases by virtue of Section 83 of Finance Act, 1994. Appe...
Blue Moon Fragrances and Another Vs. Commr. of Customs (Prev.), Kolkat ...
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Kolkata
Decided on: May-01-2014
DR. I.P. Lal, J. 1. These applications are filed seeking waiver of pre-deposit of Customs duty of Rs.8,76,699/- , interest (not quantified) and penalty of Rs.8,76,699/- imposed on M/s. Blue Moon Fragrances, Kolkata (Applicant No. 1) and penalty of Rs.2,50,000/- imposed on Md. Ismail, proprietor of the said applicant company. 2. At the outset, the Ld. Advocate appearing on behalf of the applicants has submitted that they had filed two bills of entry No. 205579 dated-28/9/2004 and 241387 dated 15/7/2005 for the goods imported from Singapore and Indonesia based suppliers respectively. The goods were declared to be Patchouli Oil (SL8) and Patchouli Oil (PS 24). The consignments were examined at the material time by the proper officer and the proper officer after having satisfied in all respects allowed the clearances of the goods without raising any objection. Subsequently, the officers of DRI investigated the case resulting into issue of show cause notice proposing enhancement of value ba...
Japfa Comfeed India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commr of Central Excise, Haldia Comm ...
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Kolkata
Decided on: May-01-2014
DR. D.M. Misra, J. 1. This application is filed seeking waiver of pre-deposit of service tax of Rs.59,73,849/- and equal amount of penalty imposed under Section 78 and penalty under Section 76(not quantified) of the Finance Act, 1994. 2. At the outset, the Ld. Consultant for the applicant submits that during the relevant period i.e. 2005-2006 to 2007-2008, the applicant had received services of goods transport agency(GTA) at their unit at Kharagpur. The Ld. Consultant submits that the said service tax liability on GTA services had been discharged at their Pune unit as at the relevant point of time, the Kharagpur unit had not obtained service tax Registration, which they took only w.e.f. 1st July, 2007. He submits that in support of the fact that they paid service tax on account of availing GTA services at Kharagpur Unit from their Pune unit, submitted a Chartered Accountants Certificate before the adjudicating authority. The Ld. Consultant submitted that the adjudicating authority ...