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.
Medicare Services (India) Pvt. Ltd. and anr. Vs. the Customs Excise an ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-26-2014
WP No.755 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE MEDICARE SERVICES (INDIA) PVT.LTD.& ANR. Versus THE CUSTOMS EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, EZB & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE I.P.MUKERJ.Date : 26th August, 2014. Appearance: Mr.Agnibesh Sengupta, Advocate Mr.Subhrendu Halder, Advocate for the petitioners Mr.R.Bharadwaj, Advocate Mr.Subir Kumar Saha, Advocate for respondent No.2 The Court: The company (writ petitioner) is charged by the respondent authorities with not having paid service tax. According to them, they were and still are rendering insurance auxiliary services which are exigible to service tax. This is denied by the writ petitioner contending that they are not acting as agents of anybody but acting on principal to principal basis. The writ petitioner is also charged with having obtained CENVAT credit irregularly. The total demand of the revenue against the writ petitioner is Rs.9.5 crores. This matter came up once ...
Appellant Vs. Respondent
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-26-2014
ORDER SHEET CP No.19 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Original Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE IN THE MATTEER OF: CHOWDHURY PACKAGING PVT.LTD.AND IN THE MATTER OF: PURANDAR INVESTMENT PVT.LTD.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE BISWANATH SOMADDER Date : 26th August, 2014. Appearance : Mr.Bidyut Dutta, Adv.Mr.Bijan Dutta, Adv.for the petitioner The Court: Affidavit of service filed in Court today on behalf of the petitioning creditor be taken on record. This matter had earlier appeared before this Court on 21st February, 2014 at the post advertisement stage when none appeared on behalf of the company. Directions were given for filing of affidavits. This order was communicated to the respondent company as also its directORS.However, the company has chosen not to file any affidavit-in-opposition in the matter. It is evident from the records that on 15th March, 2013 the winding up petition was admitted for a principal sum of Rs.12,36,037/- together with interest at the rate of eight per cent per a...
C. I. T. Kolkata Ii Vs. Gayatri Portfolio Fund (P) Ltd
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-26-2014
ORDER SHEET ITA664OF2004IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Special Jurisdiction (Income Tax) ORIGINAL SIDE C.I.T. KOLKATA - II Versus GAYATRI PORTFOLIO FUND (P) LTD BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMITRA PAL The Hon'ble JUSTICE ARINDAM SINHA Date : 26th August, 2014. For Appellant/Revenue : Mr.S.N.Dutta,Advocate The Court : This appeal under section 260A of the Income Tax Act 1961 has been preferred by the appellant/revenue against the order dated 11th May, 2004 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, A Bench, Calcutta in ITA No.2067/KOL/2003 for the assessment year 1995-96 on the following questions : 1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in deleting the addition of Rs.16,00,000/- made by the Assessing Officer in the total income of the assessee; 2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the assessee has discharged his onus with regard to share application money received from 5 differe...
Srei Equipment Finance Pvt Ltd. (Sefpl) Vs. Peddibabu Venkatrao Gubbal ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-26-2014
GA No.192 of 2012 EC No.517 of 2011 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction SREI EQUIPMENT FINANCE PVT LTD.(SEFPL) Versus PEDDIBABU VENKATRAO GUBBALA & ANR. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMEN SEN Date : 26th August, 2014. Appearance: Mr.Utpal Bose, Sr.Adv.Mr.Swatarup Banerjee, Adv.The Court : In spite of ordeRs.none appears on behalf of M/S.Noble Enterprises who claims that they are the owners of the cranes. The documents produced by Mr.Utpal Bose, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the decree-holder, show that the said cranes are hypothecated to the decree-holder. The report filed by the Receiver shows that the said cranes are lying in the go-down of M/s.G.S. Shetty and Sons at Kolke, Mumbai, Pune Highway. The owner of the go-down of M/s.G.A. Shetty and Sons is directed to produce and hand over the cranes to the Receiver who shall after taking possession of the cranes keep them in his custody at a place to be provided by the decree-holder. In case...
Rohit Ferro Tech Ltd. and ors. Vs. Settlement Commission and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-26-2014
WP No.393 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION ORIGINAL SIDE Rohit Ferro Tech LTD.& ORS.Versus Settlement Commission & ORS.Before: The Hon'ble Justice I.P.MUKERJ.Date: 26th August 2014 Appearance: Mr.Sudhir Kr. Mehta, Advocate for the petitioner Mr.R.N. Das, Sr.Advocate MRS.Santa Mitra, Advocate for the respondents The Court: In this case four show-cause notices were dealt with by the Settlement Commission at an earlier point of time. This case arises out of an application made by the writ petitioner under Section 32E of the Central Excise Act, 1944 with regard to the fifth show-cause notice. It appears that the Settlement Commission in its order dated 28th March 2014 has not made a correct interpretation of Section 32-O(i) of the Central Excise Act, which is reproduced below: 32-O. [Where, [***].]. (i) an order of settlement passed under sub-section (7) of section 32F [, as it stood immediately before the commencement of section 122 of the Finance Ac...
Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Iii Vs. Ritesh Construction (P) Lt ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-26-2014
ORDER SHEET ITA No.81 of 2005 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA SPECIAL JURISDICTION (INCOME TAX) ORIGINAL SIDE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL III Versus RITESH CONSTRUCTION (P) LTD.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMITRA PAL The Hon'ble JUSTICE ARINDAM SINHA Date : 26th August, 2014. Appearance: Mr.P.Dudhoria, Adv.The Court :- This appeal under the Income Tax Act, 1961 has been preferred by the Appellant/Revenue against the order dated October 14, 2004 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal E Bench, Calcutta in I.T.A.No.492 (Kol) of 2003 for the Assessment Year 1993-94 on the following questions: [I].Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that if the expenses were to be assessed as the deemed income of the assessee the same amount would have to be allowed as business expenditure?. [II].Whether there was any material before the Tribunal in deleting the addition of Rs.4,78,445/- made by the Assessing Officer under Section 69C of t...
M/S. Asha Stimex Limited Vs. Ram Awatar Bansal and Co.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-26-2014
ORDER SHEET C.P.No.309 of 2008 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA ORIGINAL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL SIDE IN THE MATTER OF: M/S.ASHA STIMEX LIMITED Versus RAM AWATAR BANSAL & Co.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE BISWANATH SOMADDER Date: 26th August, 2014. Appearance: Ms.Pratima Mishra, Adv. for the petitioner The Court: This winding up application is being contested by the respondent company who have categorically stated in its affidavit that the petition is not maintainable since there has been suppression of material facts and/or submission of distorted facts. In paragraph No.8 of the affidavit, the respondent company has specifically denied that the petitioner sold or supplied or delivered the materials pursuant to the order placed by the company between 15th February, 2007 and 27th June, 2008 on credit valued at Rs.27,36,033/-. It is also denied that the said materials were duly accepted by the company without raising any objection thereto in respect of the quality and quantity of the goods. It i...
C. I. T. Kolkata/Jalpaiguri Vs. Hare Krishna Mondal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-26-2014
ORDER SHEET ITA NO.800 OF2004IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Special Jurisdiction(Income-tax) ORIGINAL SIDE IN THE MATTER: C.I.T. KOLKATA/JALPAIGURI Versus HARE KRISHNA MONDAL BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMITRA PAL The Hon'ble JUSTICE ARINDAM SINHA Date : 26th August, 2014. MR.NIZAMUDDIN,ADVOCATE APPEARS FOR APPELLANT/REVENUE The Court : The appeal preferred by the appellant/revenue was admitted on the following substantial question of law. Whether the conclusion arrived at by the Tribunal in allowing the loss of Rs.4,23,961/- for assessment year 199596 for which neither return was filed before the date of search nor the said loss was determined by the Assessing Officer, is perveRs.?. Perused the order passed by the Tribunal, we find that the Tribunal while considering the matter had held as under; In the case on hand no return of income was filed by the assessee accordingly for A.Y.assessed in 1995-96 regular and no loss assessment. was It is, therefore clear that the loss for A.Y.199...
C. I. T. Kolkata Ii Vs. Norben Tea and Exports Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-26-2014
ORDER SHEET ITA NO.829 OF2004IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Special Jurisdiction(Income-tax) ORIGINAL SIDE IN THE MATTER OF : C.I.T. KOLKATA - II Versus NORBEN TEA & EXPORTS LTD.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMITRA PAL The Hon'ble JUSTICE ARINDAM SINHA Date : 26th August, 2014. Mr.R.N.Bandhyopadhyay, advocate for appellant Mr.Sourabh Bagaria, advocate assisting the Court The Court : This appeal has been preferred under section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 by the appellant/revenue against the order dated 9th August, 2004 passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal E Bench, Calcutta in ITA No.952(Kol) of 2003 for the Assessment Year 1996-97 on the following questions; I) Whether the Tribunal was right in allowing depreciation @ 100% on Fluid Bed Dryer; II) Whether the Fluid Bed Dryer can be said to be energy device for the purpose of grant of depreciation @ 100% as claimed by the assessee. We find that the assessee had claimed 100% depreciation of Fluid Bed Dryer being an energy savin...
Sri Jawahar Singh Vs. the United Bank of India and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-25-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION ORIGINAL SIDE W.P.No.787 of 2014 Sr.JAWAHAR SINGH Versus THE UNITED BANK OF INDIA & ORS.With W.P.No.788 of 2014 Sr.JAWAHAR SINGH Versus THE UNITED BANK OF INDIA & ORS.BEFORE: THE HON'BLE JUSTICE INDRAJIT CHATTERJEE For the petitioner : Mr.Debajyoti Basu, Adv.Mr.Suvadip Bhattacharjee, Adv.For the respondents: Mr.Basudeb Mukherjee, Adv.Heard on: 21st August, 2014. Judgment on: 25th August, 2014. INDRAJIT CHATTERJEE, J. : A common order is being passed in respect of both the writ applications as noted in the previous order dated 21st August, 2014 in W.P.No.788 of 2013. The present petitioner who is the defaulting borrower has prayed for writ of mandamus to cancel the demand notices, possession notices and also to rescind the proposed e-auction sale notice as appeared in the newspapeRs.The subject matter of writ petition No.787 of 2014 is the ground floor along with the car parking space of a multistoried building and in W.P.No...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- Next ›
- Last »