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.
Auroshikha Vinimay Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Kai Commercial Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-16-2014
ORDER SHEET APOT5142014 ACO1702014 CP6132014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Civil Appellate Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE AUROSHIKHA VINIMAY PVT.LTD.Versus KAI COMMERCIAL PVT.LTD.BEFORE: The Hon'ble CHIEF JUSTICE MRS.MANJULA CHELLUR The Hon'ble JUSTICE BANERJEE Date : 16th September, 2014. Mr.Anuj Singh, Advocate Mr.S.E.Huda, Advocate Ms.Purnima Nath, Advocate for the appellant. The Court : Heard learned Counsel for the appellant. We have gone through the order of the learned Single Judge. Apparently, the appellant was the landlord whose premises is in occupation of the respondent-company. Certainly it is a case where the respondent-tenant seems to be in arrears of rent and is not vacating the premises as well. There has to be a termination of tenancy in terms of the Transfer of Property Act and if any arrears of rent exists, the same has to be recovered in a civil court. The winding-up petition seeking winding-up of the company is not an answer as alternative remedy is provided in civil c...
Smt. Mousumi Roy Vs. Shri Dayal Saha
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-16-2014
ORDER SHEET GA No.1762 of 2014 With CS No.460 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE SMT. MOUSUMI ROY Versus SHRI DAYAL SAHA BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMEN SEN Date : 16th September, 2014. Appearance: Mr.Satadeep Bhattacharyya, Adv.The Court: In spite of notice none appears on behalf of the defendant. The defendant has taken out this application for revocation of leave under Clause 12 of the Letters Patent. In the alternative, the plaintiff has prayed for rejection of the suit. It is submitted that the plaintiff is residing outside the jurisdiction of this Court so also the defendant realized claim in the plaint is in respect of the property situated at premises no.130A Maheshwartala Road, P.S. Tiljala it is outside the jurisdiction of this Honble Court. The plaintiff seeks delivery of a cancellation of a deed of conveyance purportedly executed within the jurisdiction of this court. It is submitted that the prayers made in the plain...
Gangol Vincom Pvt. Ltd.Petitioner Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward1[4], Ko ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-16-2014
ORDER SHEET W.P.No.1284 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE GANGOL VINCo.PVT.LTD.Versus INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1[4]., KOLKATA & ORS.Petitioner Respondents BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE I.P.MUKERJ.Date : 16th September, 2014. For Petitioner : Mr.Dipak Dey with Mr.Ananda Sen & Mr.Pintu Ghosh, Adversus None appears for the respondents. The facts of this case are identical to W.P.No.1280 of 2013 [Dewdrops Merchants PVT.LTD.versus Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(4).Kolkata & Ors.].Orders passed in deserving cases often become flawed for lack of reasons. We do not yet know whether this case is deserving or not, but the order under Section 127(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 12th September, 2013 is flawed for lack of reasons. From the submissions made, there is no doubt in my mind that the writ petitioner was heard. It appears that this transfer order was passed for assessment of the writ petitioner in Bhubaneshwar because of the need for centr...
C. I. T. Kolkata Ii Vs. Regency Trust Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-16-2014
ORDER SHEET ITA663of 2004 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Special Jurisdiction (Income Tax) ORIGINAL SIDE C.I.T. KOLKATA - II Versus REGENCY TRUST LTD.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMITRA PAL AND THE Honble JUSTICE DEBANGSU BASAK Date : 16th September, 2014. Appearance: Mr.S.N.Dutta, Adv.The Court: Since none has appeared on behalf of the appellant when the matter is taken up for hearing. Mr.S.N.Dutta, learned Advocate who normally appears on behalf of the Revenue, is requested to appear in this matter. The learned Central Government Advocate on Record is directed to regularise his appointment. We find that the appeal was admitted on the following question: 1) Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal erred in law in holding that the identity of the loan creditORS.the genuineness of the transaction and the credit worthiness of loan creditors were established and therefore the addition u/s.68 of the I.T.Act 1961 is unjustified whereas the A.O.specifically observed and found that the loan...
J. Thomas Trading and Investments Pvt. Ltd Vs. Commissioner I.Tax, W.B ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-16-2014
ORDER SHEET ITA No.736 of 2004 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Special Jurisdiction (Income Tax) ORIGINAL SIDE J. THOMAS TRADING & INVESTMENTS PVT.LTD Versus COMMISSIONER I.TAX, W.B.- III,KOLKATA BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMITRA PAL The Hon'ble JUSTICE DEBANGSU BASAK Date : 16th September, 2014. Appearance: Ms.Mamata Bhargav, Adv.The Court : The appeal was admitted on the following questions:1) Whether on a true and proper interpretation of the provisions of Section 2(7) and 5 of the Interest Tax Act, 1974, the amount charged by the Appellant for arranging bill discounting facility with the Bank for its clients amounted to interest on any loan or advance chargeable under the provisions of the Act and the Tribunal was justified in law in rejecting the Appellants said contention?.2) Whether on a true and proper interpretation of Section 2(5B) (iv) of the Act, the bill discounting facility arranged by the Appellant with the Bank for its clients constituted the business of providing fina...
C.i.T. Kolkatai Vs. Lcc Infotech Ltd
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-16-2014
ORDER SHEET ITA267of 2005 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Special Jurisdiction (Income Tax) ORIGINAL SIDE C.I.T.KOLKATA-I Versus LCC INFOTECH LTD BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMITRA PAL The Honble JUSTICE DEBANGSU BASAK Date : 16th September, 2014. For appellant : Mr.M.P.Agarwal,Advocate For respondent/assessee: Mr.S.Biswas,Advocate Mr.Ejaz Khan,Advocate The Court : This appeal has been filed under section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against order dated 28.2.2005 passed by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, D Bench, Kolkata in ITA Nos.2355 & 2593 (Kol) of 2003 relating to assessment year 2000-01 on the following questions : 1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is correct in holding that goodwill is an intangible asset entitled to depreciation within the meaning of section 2(11).read with section 32(1)(ii) and Explanation 3 to section 43(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961.2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the cas...
Commissioner of Income Tax, Koli Vs. M/S. Abp Tv. Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-16-2014
ORDER SHEET G.A.NO.1383 OF2014ITAT32of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Special Jurisdiction (Income Tax) ORIGINAL SIDE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOL-I Versus M/S.ABP TV. PVT.LTD.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMITRA PAL The Honble JUSTICE DEBANGSU BASAK Date : 16th September, 2014. For appellant : Mrs.Soma Chatterjee,Advocate For respondent/assessee: Mr.J.P.Khaitan,Senior Advocate Ms.Anupa Banerjee,Advocate The Court : This appeal has been filed under section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against order dated 17.12.2013 passed by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, C Bench, Kolkata in ITA Nos.1313 & 1314/Kol/2012 relating to assessment years 2007-08 and 2009-10, on the following questions : 1. Whether the Tribunal was right in restricting the disallowance made under section 14A read with Rule 8(D) without appreciating the fact that there is no proof produced on record that no interest bearing fund was utilized for investment.2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the L...
C. I. T. Central Iii, Kolkata Vs. Vasant Seta
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-16-2014
ITA No.638 of 2004 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Special Jurisdiction (Income Tax) C.I.T. CENTRAL - III, KOLKATA Versus VASANT SETA BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMITRA PAL The Hon'ble JUSTICE DEBANGSU BASAK Date : 16th September, 2014. Ms.Smita Das De, Adv.appears The Court : The appeal appears to have been admitted on 4th September, 2004 on the following questions: i. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in deleting the addition of Rs.25,00,000/- out of Bank balance, fixed deposit receipt and investment in shares; ii. Whether the findings and observation of the Tribunal that the statement recorded under section 132(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 though based on evidence but not conclusive as the same is rebuttable is erroneous and perveRs.in the facts of the present case Heard Ms.Das De, learned advocate for the appellant. We find that the learned Tribunal while dismissing the appeal being I.T.A.No.1508 (Kol.)/2002 held as follows: There i...
Sharmila Shetty and anr. Vs. Hemendra Barooah Benevolent and Family Tr ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-15-2014
1 ORDER SHEET GA15782014 CS1752014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE SHARMILA SHETTY & ANR. Versus HEMENDRA BAROOAH BENEVOLENT & FAMILY TRUST & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMEN SEN Date : 15th September, 2014. Mr.S.K.Kapur, Sr.Adv., with Mr.Roy Chowdhury, Adv., for plaintiffs. Mr.R.Banerjee, Sr.Adv., with Mr.D.N.Sharma, Adv., for defendants. The Court : The plaintiff no.1 is the daughter of one Hemendra Prasad Barooah who had created a vast empire during his lifetime and held various properties either in his individual name or in the name of the trust that he had created by executing a trust deed dated April 5, 2011. The plaintiffs instituted the suit claiming, inter alia, for declaration that the amendments of the deed of trust dated April 5, 2011 by the deeds dated November 21, 2011; November 2, 2012 and February 8, 2013 are wrongful and illegal and are consequently non est. the plaintiffs have also prayed for declaration that some...
Commissioner of Income Tax Iv , Kolkata Vs. Knd Engineering Technoligi ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-15-2014
ORDER SHEET ITA285of 2004 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Special Jurisdiction (Income Tax) ORIGINAL SIDE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - IV , KOLKATA versus KND ENGINEERING TECHNOLIGIES LTD BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMITRA PAL The Hon'ble JUSTICE DEBANGSU BASAK Date : 15TH SEPTEMBER, 2014. Appearance : MR.P.K.BHOWMIK,ADVOCATE FOR APPELLANT/REVENUE MR.V.MURARKA,ADVOCATE MS.SUTAPA ROYCHOWDHURY,ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT. The Court : Though the appeal was admitted on a particular question on 29th March, 2012, we reframe it in the following manner : Whether the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the loss occurred in the assessment year 1992-93 and not in the assessment year 1996-97 when arbitration proceedings were concluded. Heard Mr.P.K.Bhowmik, learned advocate for the appellant and Mr.V.Murarka, learned advocate for the respondent. There is no dispute that pursuant to a contract signed on 24th February, 1988 between CIWTC and the assessee, the assessee was entrusted to construc...
- ‹ Prev
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 20
- Next ›
- Last »