Kolkata Court August 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.
C. I. T. Kolkata Ii Vs. K. B. Sales Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-08-2014
ORDER SHEET ITA NO.580 OF2004IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Special Jurisdiction (Income Tax) ORIGINAL SIDE C.I.T. KOLKATA - II Versus K.B.SALES LTD.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMITRA PAL The Hon'ble JUSTICE ARINDAM SINHA Date : 8th August, 2014. For Appellant/Petitioner : Mr.R.N.Sinha,Advocate For Respondent : Mr.J.P.Khaitan,Sr.Advocate The Court : This appeal has been preferred by the Revenue against the order dated 24th March, 2004 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, B-Bench, Kolkata in ITA Nos.1845 to 1850/Kol/2003 for the assessment years 1994-95 to 1999-2000. The appeal was admitted on 14th January, 2005 on the following questions :1. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case the Tribunal was right in dis agreeding with the finding of the C.I.T.,Appeals without giving any reasons in support of such finding on the face of the finding of the C.I.T.,Appeals and therefore, the order of the Tribunal would be perveRs.?.2. Whether without any finding as to the ingenui...
Dhruba Pada Bayen and ors. Vs. the Official Liquidator, High Court, Ca ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-07-2014
ORDER SHEET CA NO.386 OF2014CP NO.313 OF2012IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Original Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE IN THE MATTER OF : M/S.RUBI STAR REAL ESTATE AND HOUSING DEVELOPMENT LTD.(IN LIQUIDATION) AND DHRUBA PADA BAYEN & ORS.Versus THE OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR, HIGH COURT, CALCUTTA & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE BISWANATH SOMADDER Date : 7th August, 2014. MR.DIPAK BASU,SR.ADVOCATE, MR.BIDYUT BHATTACHARYA, MR.A.K.LALA,ADVOCATES FOR PETITIONER MR.S.P.SARKAR,SR ADVOCATE, MR.SAMIR BHATTACHARJEE, MD.JIAUR RAHAMAN ADVOCATES FOR RESPONDENT NOS.2 AND3The Court : This application has been taken out under Rule 9 of the Companies (Court) Rules, 1959. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent nos.2 and 3 takes a preliminary objection with regard to maintainability of the application against his clients who are two individuals and who have nothing to do with any of the companies which are reflected in the application. It is also submitted by the learned counsel appearing on behalf ...
Momtaj @ Momataj @ Mumtaj Begum Vs. Cesc Ltd. and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-07-2014
ORDER SHEET W.P.No.136 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL SIDE MOMTAJ @ MOMATAJ @ MUMTAJ BEGUM Versus CESC LTD.AND ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE DEBANGSU BASAK Date: 7th August, 2014. Appearance: Mr.Sandip Kr. Bhattacharya, Adv.Mr.Suman Basu, Adv. for the petitioner Mr.P.S.Bose, Sr.Adv.Ms.Rita Mukherjee, Adv. for the CESC LTD.The Court: The grievance of the writ petitioner relates to disconnection effected by the CESC authorities. The petitioner claims that the meter of the petitioner is defective. Prior to the writ petition the petitioner approached the Consumer Forum. DiveRs.orders were passed in such proceedings right upto the National Commission level. It has since been held in the Consumer Forum proceeding that the Forum did not have jurisdiction to entertain the complaint made by the petitioner before it. On behalf of the CESC authorities it is claimed that, a final sum of Rs.15,641.36p is due and payable by the writ petitioner w...
Sri Anup Kumar Maity Vs. the State Bank of India and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-07-2014
ORDER SHEET W.P.No.405 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL SIDE Sr.ANUP KUMAR MAITY Versus THE STATE BANK OF INDIA & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE DEBANGSU BASAK Date: 7th August, 2014. Appearance: Mr.Rahul Karmakar, Adv. for the petitioner Mr.Ranjan Kumar Koley, Adv.Mr.S.Alam, Adv. for the respondent no.5 The Court: The writ petitioner participated in a sale of an immovable property at the instance of the respondent no.1. The respondent no.1 put up immovable property for sale as would appear from page 31 of the petition. The bid of the petitioner was accepted by the State Bank of India. The State Bank of India issued a sale certificate dated July 8, 2010. The immovable property sold by the State Bank of India is premises No.43, Malanga Lane, Kolkata-700012. The petitioner requested the State Bank of India to make over possession of such property. The State Bank of India failed to do so. After various correspondences the petitioner appr...
Lovelock and Lewes and anr. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Kolkataxix ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-07-2014
ORDER SHEET WP No.735 OF2014IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE LOVELOCK & LEWES & ANR. Versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA-XIX & ORS. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE I.P.MUKERJ.Date : 7th August, 2014. Mr.S.Pal, senior advocate, Mr.D.Kundu, senior advocate, Mr.I.Nandi, Mr.D.P.Samantafor petitioneRs.Mr.R.N.Bandyopadhya, Mr.P.Dudhoriafor respondents. The Court : The fiRs.writ petitioner is a firm of Chartered Accountants and AuditORS.the second writ petitioner being its partner. A question of limitation is raised with regard to a notice to the fiRs.writ petitioner under Section 142[1].of the Income Tax Act, 1961 which is dated 4th April, 2014, for the assessment year 2011-2012. Latest, this notice, it is contended, ought to have been issued and served by 31st March, 2014. Otherwise, the proceedings become non est in the eyes of law. However, there is a reference in the notice that a representative of the writ petitioners was informed telephoni...
Shri Debdulal Maity Vs. National Insurance Co. Ltd. and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-07-2014
WP No.728 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE SHRI DEBDULAL MAITY Versus NATIONAL INSURANCE Co.LTD.& ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE I.P.MUKERJ.Date : 7th August, 2014. Appearance: Mr.Debojyoti Basu, Advocate Mr.Arunava Ganguly, Advocate Mr.Abhijit Gangopadhyay, Advocate The Court: This writ application is against a transfer order dated 19th June, 2014 transferring the service of the writ petitioner to Kolkata Division - XIV (under CRO-I).He is working as a senior assistant with the respondent insurance company and in the concerned department since 8th December, 2010. His grievance against the order of transfer is this. It is in violation of the Job rotation transfer and mobility policy for the supervisory, clerical and subordinate staff of the respondent organisation. The following paragraph of the policy is relied upon :Job Rotation (within the same station) :- 4.1 Every employee in the cadres of Supervisory, Clerical and Subordinate S...
Satya Sandhi and anr. Vs. State of West Bengal and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-07-2014
ORDER SHEET WP No.650 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE IN THE MATTER OF: SATYA SANDHI & ANR. Versus STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ANR. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE DEBANGSU BASAK Date : 7th August, 2014. APPEARANCE: MR.SANDIP KUMAR BHATTACHARYYA, ADVOCATE. For the PetitioneRs.Mr.SAAKYA SEN, ADVOCATE..For the State-Respondents. The Court :-The writ petitioners seek a writ of quo warranto against the respondent no.2. The writ petitioners claim that since a criminal investigation by his subordinate was allegedly misdirected by such subordinate officeRs.the respondent no.2 rendered himself unfit to hold his office and therefore writ of quo warranto should be issued to remove him from his office. The writ petitioners submit that, there are subsisting disputes with regard to the persons entitled to represent the petitioner no.1. The various proceedings with regard to the composition of the writ petitioner no.1 and its representations were taken and...
Xviii, Kolkata Vs. M/S. Rakshit Jewellery Palace
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-07-2014
ITAT No.85 of 2014 GA No.1928 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Special Jurisdiction (Income Tax) ORIGINAL SIDE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLXVIII, KOLKATA -VersusM/S.RAKSHIT JEWELLERY PALACE Appearance: Mr.S.B.Saraf, Adv...for the appellant. BEFORE: The Honble JUSTICE SOUMITRA PAL The Hon'ble JUSTICE ARINDAM SINHA Date : 7th August, 2014. The Court : Let the appeal be admitted. Let the appeal be heard on the following questions : 1. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the instant case the learned Tribunal was correct in law in reducing the addition of Rs.40,81,656/- made under section 69B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 to Rs.1,62,417/- being the value of unexplained stock of gold ornaments found during survey at the business premises of the assessee without appreciating the evidences on record ?.2. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the instant case the learned Tribunal was correct in law in granting the above relief without appreciating that:(i) Partner sworn Shri Sou...
Appellant Vs. Respondent
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-07-2014
ORDER SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Original Jurisdiction C.P.No.575 of 2014 C.A.No.329 of 2014 RE : DHUNSERI PETROCHEM & TEA LTD AND ORS BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE BISWANATH SOMADDER Date : 7th August, 2014. Mr.B.Banerji, Sr.Adv., Mr.D.N.Sharma,Adv., Mr.A.Agarwal, Adv.with Ms.R.Saha, Adv.Mr.K.Shah, Adv.The Court : Let affidavits filed in Court today be taken on record. This is an application under sections 391(2) and 394 read with section 100 of the Companies Act, 1956. Certain technical observations have been made by the Central Government which are in paragraphs 2(a).(b) and (c) of the affidavit filed by the Central Government. So far as the objection made in paragraphs 2(a) and (c) are concerned, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners have submitted that their client will comply with the same after the scheme is approved by this Court. So far as the observation made in paragraph 2(b) of the affidavit filed by the Central Government is concerned, he submits that th...
Vikash Bagaria and anr. Vs. Farooque Ahmed and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-07-2014
GA No.2908 of 2013 CS No.383 of 2012 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction VIKASH BAGARIA & ANR. Versus FAROOQUE AHMED & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMEN SEN Date : 7th August, 2014. Appearance: Mr.K.R. Thakkar, Adv.Mr.S.N. Mitra, Sr.Adv.Mr.Raja Basu Chowdhury, Adv.The Court : This is an application by the plaintiff for amendment of the plaint and addition of defendant no.10 as a party defendant in the suit. The plaintiffs filed a suit for specific performance against the defendant Nos.1 and 2. In the said proceeding, an order was passed on 3rd December, 2012 directing the parties to maintain status quo in respect of the undivided half share of the respondent No.1 in the subject premises till 7th December, 2012. The said order was extended from time to time and the said interim order is still subsisting. The plaintiff states that on June 12, 2013 while making a search in the office of Registrar of assurance, it transpired that by a deed of conveyance ...
- ‹ Prev
- 22
- 23
- 24
- 25
- 26
- 28
- 29
- 30
- 31
- 32
- Next ›
- Last »