Kolkata Court July 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.
Cit.Koliii Vs. M/S. International Constructions
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-15-2014
ITAT No.217 of 2013 GA No.3763 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Special Jurisdiction (Income Tax) ORIGINAL SIDE CIT.KOL-III -VersusM/S.INTERNATIONAL CONSTRUCTIONS LTD.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE GIRISH CHANDRA GUPTA The Hon'ble JUSTICE DR. MRINAL KANTI CHAUDHURI Date : 15th July, 2014. Appearance: Ms.Asha G. Gutgutia, Adv...for the appellant. Mr.J.P.Khaitan, Sr.Adv.Mr.Pramit Bag, Adv.Mr.C.S.Das, Adv...for the respondents. The Court : the subject-matter of challenge in this appeal is a judgment and order dated 14th June, 2013 by which the learned appellate Tribunal dismissed the appeal preferred by the revenue agreeing with the views expressed by the CIT (Appeal).The revenue has come up in appeal before this Court. The question for consideration was whether the CIT (Appeal) erred in deleting the disallowance of interest to the tune of Rs.45,93,522/- under Section 14A of the Income Tax Act which was determined by the assessing officer applying Rule 8D. The reasoning offered by the C...
Vs. Spectra Fashions Pvt. Ltd. and ors.Defendants/Respo
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-15-2014
ORDER SHEET T.A.No.120 of 2014 G.A.No.of 2014 T. No.255 of 2014 C.S.No.of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE SPECTRA WORLDWIDE LIC Versus SPECTRA FASHIONS PVT.LTD.& ORS.Plaintiff/Petitioner Defendants/Respondents BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE I.P.MUKERJ.Date : 15th July, 2014. For Plaintiff/Petitioner : Mr.Ranjan Bachawat, Sr.Adv.with Mr.Soumabha Ghose, Mr.Anubhav Sinha & Mr.Chiranjib Sinha, Adversus For Defendant No.1 : Mr.Avik Banerjee, Adv.For Defendant Nos.2&3 : Mr.Pramit Roy, Sr.Adv.with Mr.Rajib Mullick, Adv.It appears from the submissions of learned counsel for the plaintiff that the defendants were their agents or collaboratORS.According to the plaintiff, cloth of diveRs.description and quantity was sent by them to the defendants for stitching them into garments. The fittings and other accessories required to stitch the cloth were provided by the defendants. The defendants shipped these ready-made garments to the plaintiff in the...
Amajit De Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-15-2014
ORDER SHEET WP No.641 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE AMAJIT DE Versus STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE DIPANKAR DATTA Date: 15th July, 2014 Mr.Sanjay Saha, Advocate ..for the petitioner Mr.Sabhyasachi Roy Chowdhury, Advocate ..for the respondents The petitioner was a panel advocate of the State of West Bengal since 2003 till May, 2011. He is aggrieved because the bills raised by him for professional services rendered have not been cleared. I have heard learned advocates for the parties. It is not in dispute that the petitioner had been an empanelled advocate for nearly 8 yeaRs.In my considered view, the office of the Legal Remembrancer owes a duty to look into the bills that have been raised by the petitioner and to say, for good reasons, to what extent he is not entitled to the fees charged by him and to release such quantum of payment to the petitioner, as are found to be admissible. That would necessarily re...
Nurul Islam Khan Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-15-2014
ORDER SHEET WP No.631 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE NURUL ISLAM KHAN Versus STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE DIPANKAR DATTA Date: 15th July, 2014 Ms.Rina Banerjee, Advocate ..for the petitioner Mr.Sabhyasachi Roy Chowdhury, Advocate ..for the respondents The petitioner was a panel advocate of the State of West Bengal since 1997 till May, 2011. He is aggrieved because the bills raised by him for professional services rendered have not been cleared. I have heard learned advocates for the parties. It is not in dispute that the petitioner had been an empanelled advocate for nearly 14 yeaRs.In my considered view, the office of the Legal Remembrancer owes a duty to look into the bills that have been raised by the petitioner and to say, for good reasons, to what extent he is not entitled to the fees charged by him and to release such quantum of payment to the petitioner, as are found to be admissible. That would nece...
Abha Ray Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-15-2014
ORDER SHEET WP No.645 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE ABHA RAY Versus STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE DIPANKAR DATTA Date: 15th July, 2014 Ms.Rina Banerjee, Advocate ..for the petitioner Mr.Sabhyasachi Roy Chowdhury, Advocate ..for the respondents The petitioner was a panel advocate of the State of West Bengal since 2003 till May, 2011. She is aggrieved because the bills raised by her for professional services rendered have not been cleared. I have heard learned advocates for the parties. It is not in dispute that the petitioner had been an empanelled advocate for nearly 8 yeaRs.In my considered view, the office of the Legal Remembrancer owes a duty to look into the bills that have been raised by the petitioner and to say, for good reasons, to what extent she is not entitled to the fees charged by her and to release such quantum of payment to the petitioner, as are found to be admissible. That would necessarily...
Continental Transport and Const. Corpn. Vs. Vijaya Bank Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-15-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE CS68OF2002CONTINENTAL TRANSPORT & CONST. CORPN. Versus VIJAYA BANK LTD. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMEN SEN Date :15. h July, 2014. Mr.Pallav Banerjee, Advocate for plaintiff Mr. P.C. Sen, Sr. Advocate Mr. K.Mondal, Advocate Mr. S. Prasad, Advocate for defendants 2 to 7 The Court :-After considering the suggested issues filed by the parties and the pleadings the following issues are settled and set down for trial;- ISSUES1 Was the invocation of the unconditional Bank Guarantee No.4/98 vide letter dated 31.01.2002 issued in accordance with the order of the Honble Supreme Court dated July 14, 1997 read with the terms of the Contract as communicated vide letter dated 21/22.10.1997?.2. Is the plaintiff liable to pay a sum of Rs.73,26,910/- to the Defendant No.3 (Central Coal Field Ltd.)?.3. Is there any fraud committed by Defendant No.3 as alleged in the plaint?.4. Is there any element of special equity in ...
Amlan Kumar Mukherjee Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-15-2014
ORDER SHEET WP No.630 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE AMLAN KUMAR MUKHERJEE Versus STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE DIPANKAR DATTA Date: 15th July, 2014 Ms.Rina Banerjee, Advocate ..for the petitioner Mr.Sabhyasachi Roy Chowdhury, Advocate ..for the respondents The petitioner was a panel advocate of the State of West Bengal since 2004 till May, 2011. He is aggrieved because the bills raised by him for professional services rendered have not been cleared. I have heard learned advocates for the parties. It is not in dispute that the petitioner had been an empanelled advocate for nearly 7 yeaRs.In my considered view, the office of the Legal Remembrancer owes a duty to look into the bills that have been raised by the petitioner and to say, for good reasons, to what extent he is not entitled to the fees charged by him and to release such quantum of payment to the petitioner, as are found to be admissible. That would ...
Asoke Bakshi Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-15-2014
ORDER SHEET WP No.632 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE ASOKE BAKSHI Versus STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE DIPANKAR DATTA Date: 15th July, 2014 Ms.Rina Banerjee, Advocate ..for the petitioner Mr.Sadhan Roy Chowdhury, Advocate with Mr.Sabhyasachi Roy Chowdhury, Advocate ..for the respondents The petitioner was a panel advocate of the State of West Bengal since 1997 till May, 2011. He is aggrieved because the bills raised by him for professional services rendered have not been cleared. I have heard learned advocates for the parties. It is not in dispute that the petitioner had been an empanelled advocate for nearly 14 yeaRs.In my considered view, the office of the Legal Remembrancer owes a duty to look into the bills that have been raised by the petitioner and to say, for good reasons, to what extent he is not entitled to the fees charged by him and to release such quantum of payment to the petitioner, as are foun...
Soma Ray Chaudhuri Nee Laha Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-15-2014
ORDER SHEET WP No.642 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE SOMA RAY CHAUDHURI NEE LAHA Versus STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE DIPANKAR DATTA Date: 15th July, 2014 Ms.Rina Banerjee, Advocate ..for the petitioner Mr.Sabhyasachi Roy Chowdhury, Advocate ..for the respondents The petitioner was a panel advocate of the State of West Bengal since 1990 till May, 2011. She is aggrieved because the bills raised by her for professional services rendered have not been cleared. I have heard learned advocates for the parties. It is not in dispute that the petitioner had been an empanelled advocate for nearly 21 yeaRs.In my considered view, the office of the Legal Remembrancer owes a duty to look into the bills that have been raised by the petitioner and to say, for good reasons, to what extent she is not entitled to the fees charged by her and to release such quantum of payment to the petitioner, as are found to be admissible. Th...
M/S.Rashtra Udhyog Pvt.Ltd . Vs. Narendra Poddar
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-15-2014
ORDER SHEET GA No.2318 of 2013 CS No.60 of 1993 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE M/S.RASHTRA UDHYOG PVT.LTD . Versus NARENDRA PODDAR BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE DEBANGSU BASAK Date : 15th July, 2014. Appearance: Mr.D.Ghosal, Adv.Mr.S.Dasgupta, Adv.Mr.D.Ghosh, Adv.The Court : - The application was for recalling of a decree passed ex parte on February 11, 2010. The defendant contented that, it appointed a firm of Solicitors as their Advocate-on-Record. One partner of such firm was looking after the instant suit. The firm consisted of three brotheRs.The mother of the three brothers was seriously ill and ultimately expired in March 2010. Consequently, the partner was irregular in attending the Court and adequate attention could not be paid to the suit leading to the suit being decreed ex parte. It was contended that, the defendant should not be penalized for the fault of their Advocate. The suit was for recovery of money. A decree for Rs.10,6...
- ‹ Prev
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 21
- Next ›
- Last »