Kolkata Court September 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.
Standipack Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of I.Rax, Kol. Iv
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-18-2014
ORDER SHEET ITA506of 2004 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Special Jurisdiction (Income Tax) ORIGINAL SIDE STANDIPACK PVT.LTD.Versus COMMISSIONER OF I.RAX, KOL. - IV BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMITRA PAL The Hon'ble JUSTICE DEBANGSU BASAK Date : 18th September, 2014. For Revenue : Md.Nizamuddin,Advocate The Court : Even on second call, none appears on behalf of the appellant. We find that the appeal was admitted on the following questions : 1. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal misdirected itself in law and it adopted a wholly erroneous approach in confirming the disallowance of oveerseas travel (Rs.1,29,382/-) and education expenditure (Rs.10,42,012/-) in the aggregate sum of Rs.11,71,394/- incurred by the Appellant/Assessee company herein in respect of its trainee employee, Sr.Saumya Meattle and whether and its findings on the aforesaid issue are vitiated in law having been recorded by it without any material and/or in disregard of the undisputed materi...
Bhawani Shankar Tijoriwalla Vs. Rameshwarlal Vijayvargiya
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-18-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction Present : The Honble Justice Arijit Banerjee 18.09.2014 GA3154of 2013 CS1960of 1957 Bhawani Shankar Tijoriwalla versus Rameshwarlal Vijayvargiya Mr.Pradip Kumar Ghosh, Senior Advocate with Mr.Pradip Kumar Dutta, Senior Advocate for the Receiver Mr.Indranil Roy, Advocate for the Official Receiver Mr.O.P.Jhunjhunwala, Advocate/Receiver The Court :- One of the two joint Receivers appointed in the suit has left this World. The other joint Receiver Mr.O.P.Jhunjhunwala desired to be discharged. By an order dated 26th November, 2013 Mr.Jhunjhunwala was discharged subject to the terms and conditions mentioned in the said order and the Official Receiver was appointed as the Receiver in his place and stead. However, it appears from the submission of the parties as also the submission made on behalf of the Official Receiver that he is finding some technical difficulties in taking over charge as Receiver. In the premises Mr.Ananda ...
Sterling Holiday Resorts India Ltd. Vs. Kashi Nath Jhunjhunwala
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-18-2014
ORDER SHEET APOT5252014 GA30212014 EC1622014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Civil Appellate Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE STERLING HOLIDAY RESORTS INDIA LTD.Versus KASHI NATH JHUNJHUNWALA BEFORE: The Hon'ble CHIEF JUSTICE MRS.MANJULA CHELLUR The Hon'ble JUSTICE BANERJEE Date : 18th September, 2014. Mr.Surajit Nath Mitra, Senior Advocate Mr.Aditya Kanodia, Advocate for the appellant. Mr.Jishnu Chowdhury, Advocate Mr.Soumabha Ghose, Advocate for the respondent. The Court : This appeal would relate to an order passed in the execution proceeding appointing the Receiver to encash the fixed deposit that was kept as security for the decretal sum. The appellant wanted to file an affidavit. According to the appellant, such prayer was not acceded to. However, Mr.Chowdhury would dispute such contention. Despite time being given, the appellant failed to place on record their objection. The facts would depict, the application for execution was made at the twelfth year of passing of the decree. Even if ...
Tapan Adhikary Vs. Union of India
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-18-2014
ORDER SHEET EC No.455 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE TAPAN ADHIKARY Versus UNION OF INDIA BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMEN SEN Date : 18th September, 2014. Appearance: Mr.R.K.Chowdhury, Adv.for the decree-holder Mr.Animesh Kanti Ghoshal, Sr.Adv.Mr.Sutanu Chakraborty, Adv.Mr.Kallol Kr. Maity, Adv.for the respondent. The Court : The learned counsel representing the Union of India, on instruction submits that 1,54,145/- is due and payable in terms of the modified award. The basis of the calculation is stated in a calculation sheet prepared by the Senior Materials Manager which is reproduced below: (I) AMOUNT PAYABLE AS PER ARBITRATION AWARD: (A) Honble Justice Shyamal Sen (R)Sole Arbitrator by the Award dated 28/01/2004 allowed the claim of the Petitioner (i)Under head D (Amount deposited) Rs.11,86,331/(ii)Interest @ 6% on the amt. for 2604days from 12.12.96 to 28.01.04 Rs.5,07,814/Rs.16,94,145/(B) Honble Justice Shyamal Kumar S...
Poddar Projects Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Kolkataiv
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-18-2014
ORDER SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Special Jurisdiction (Income Tax) ORIGINAL SIDE ITA No.847 of 2004 PODDAR PROJECTS LTD.Versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA-IV BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMITRA PAL The Hon'ble JUSTICE DEBANGSU BASAK Date : 18th September, 2014. Ms.M.Bhargava The Court : Since none appears on behalf of the Revenue when the matter is called on. Ms.Mamata Bhargava, learned advocate, who normally appears on behalf of the Revenue, is requested to appear in this matter. The learned Central Government advocate is directed to regularize her appointment. The appeal was admitted on the following questions : i) Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ought not to have held that the surcharge on municipal tax was part of the rent and/or annual value for the purposes of section 23(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 as it stood prior to its amendment by the Finance Act, 2001 with effect from 01.04.2002 ?. ii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case ...
M/S. Prakash Engineering Works Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-18-2014
ORDER SHEET ITA No.59 of 2004 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA SPECIAL JURISDICTION (INCOME TAX) ORIGINAL SIDE M/S.PRAKASH ENGINEERING WORKS Versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMITRA PAL The Hon'ble JUSTICE DEBANGSU BASAK Date : 18th September, 2014. Appearance: Mr.Soumitra Mukherjee, Adv.Mr.H.B. Dubey, Adv.Mr.Mukesh Mishra, Adv.Mr.P.Dudhuria, Adv.The Court : This appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is from an order dated 18th September, 2003 passed by the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal A Bench, Kolkata in ITA No.1475 (Kol)/2001 for the assessment year 1994-95 on the following questions: i) Whether the burden to prove that any expenditure respect of which payment is made to a person referred to in Section 40A(2)(b) is excessive or unreasonable within the meaning of Section 40A(2)(A) is on the assessing officer can and Tribunal was justified in law in casting the burden upon the the appellant to show that the conversion charge paid by i...
Poddar Projects Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax Kolkata Iv
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-18-2014
ORDER SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Special Jurisdiction (Income Tax) ORIGINAL SIDE ITA No.806 of 2004 PODDAR PROJECTS LTD.Versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX KOLKATA - IV BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMITRA PAL The Hon'ble JUSTICE DEBANGSU BASAK Date : 18th September, 2014. Ms.A.G.Gutgutia, Advocate The Court : None appears on behalf of the appellant. The Income Tax Appeal was admitted on the following questions : i) Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ought not to have held that the surcharge on municipal tax was part of the rent and/or annual value for the purposes of section 23(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 as it stood prior to its amendment by the Finance Act, 2001 with effect from 01.04.2002 ?. ii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in law in holding that for determining annual value in accordance with the provisions of section 23 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the word rent appearing therein would e...
M/S.Dulichand Finance and Leasing Ltd. Vs. Sri Dhananjay Sharma and an ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-18-2014
EC208of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA ORIGINAL SIDE M/S.DULICHAND FINANCE & LEASING LTD.Versus Sr.DHANANJAY SHARMA & ANR. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMEN SEN Date : 18th September, 2014. For the petitioner : Mr.Mainak Bose, Advocate Mr.Ramesh Ch. Paul, Advocate . The Court :-It appears from the depositions recorded in this proceeding that the judgment-debtors had assured to hand over the vehicle to the Receiver in question sometimes in October, 2013. The judgment-debtors even before the Appeal Court had agreed to pay a sum of Rs.3 lakhs by 15th May, 2014. Today submission is sought to be made on behalf of the judgment-debtors that the vehicle had been forcefully taken away by the decree-holder on 15th October, 2013. The contention of the judgment-debtors is full of contradictions to say the least. Apart from the fact that it is a perjury being committed by the judgmentdebtORS.the judgmentdebtors have exposed themselves to other consequences. Before the judgment-debtors are bein...
Birendra Prasad Vs. the Commissioner of Customs (Port) and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-17-2014
WP No.908 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION ORIGINAL SIDE Birendra Prasad Versus The Commissioner of Customs (Port) & Anr. Before: The Hon'ble Justice I.P.MUKERJ.Date: 17th September 2014 Appearance: Mr.Sudhir Kumar Mehta, Advocate for the petitioner Mr.R.Bharadwaj, Advocate Mr.K.K. Maiti, Advocate for the respondents The Court: According to the writ petitioner, the goods which were imported by them on 16th July 2014 are classifiable under the heading 7204 of the Schedule of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975. They are scrap materials derived from electrical transformeRs.The respondent-authorities identified the goods to be such in their inspection report made on the bill of entry at page 45 of the writ petition. According to the respondent-authorities, in the bill of entry itself, being annexure P4 at page 44 of the writ petition, the writ petitioner had described the goods as siliCo.electrical steel strips/scrap originated from old and used dismantled ...
Kishor Kumar Agarwal Vs. the Commissioner of Customs (Port) and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-17-2014
WP No.907 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION ORIGINAL SIDE Kishor Kumar Agarwal Versus The Commissioner of Customs (Port) & Anr. Before: The Hon'ble Justice I.P.MUKERJ.Date: 17th September 2014 Appearance: Mr.Sudhir Kumar Mehta, Advocate for the petitioner Mr.R.Bharadwaj, Advocate Mr.K.K. Maiti, Advocate for the respondents The Court: According to the writ petitioner, the goods which were imported by them on 16th July 2014 are classifiable under the heading 7204 of the Schedule of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975. They are scrap materials derived from electrical transformeRs.The respondent-authorities identified the goods to be such in their inspection report made on the bill of entry at page 44 of the writ petition. According to the respondent-authorities, in the bill of entry itself, being annexure P4 at page 43 of the writ petition, the writ petitioner had described the goods as siliCo.electrical steel strips/scrap originated from old and used disman...
- ‹ Prev
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- Next ›
- Last »