Court : Kolkata
GA No.3768 of 2014 GA No.1527 of 2015 CS444of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE TARINI FINANCIAL ADVISORY LTD.& ANR. Versus SMT. KRISHNA DHAR & ANR. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMEN SEN Date : 30th November, 2015. Mr.Dipankar Dhar,Advocate appeaRs.Mr.Sakya Sen,Advocate appeaRs.The Court : - The repairing of the roof of the concerned premises presently under occupation of the plaintiffs could not be carried out since the Special Officer could not get access to the roof. On 22nd July, 2015 on an application filed by the plaintiffs for implementation of the order passed by the Honble Division Bench on 11th May, 2015 and after hearing the learned Counsel for the parties, on 22nd July, 2015 I have passed the following order : The Honble Division Bench disposed of the appeal by an order dated 11th May, 2015 by directing the Special Officer to have the duplicate key and use the independent separate access to reach the roof and not to use t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
ORDER SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Special Jurisdiction [Income Tax].ORIGINAL SIDE ITA304of 2005 C.I.T.KOLKATA XI Versus M/S.V.M.T.FIBRE GLASS & INDUSTRIES BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMITRA PAL The Hon'ble JUSTICE MIR DARA SHEKO Date : 26th November, 2015. Mr.M.P. Agarwal, Adv.Mr.Arnab Chakraborty, Adv Mr.Kushagra Shah, Adv.Soumitra Pal, J.:- This appeal, relating to assessment year 1990-91, was admitted on the following substantial question of law: Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is correct in holding that the Assessing Officer was not justified in rejecting the application of the assessee under section 154 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for rectification of adjustment made in intimation under section 143(1)(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, with regard to claim for deduction under section 80HHC of the Act. Facts, as evident from the record, are as follows: The respondent, that is, the assessee, had filed its return s...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
In The High Court At Calcutta Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction Original Side WP1228of 2013 Ranjan Goswami -Vs.Coal India LTD.& ORS.Before : The Honble Justice Arijit Banerjee For the petitioner : Mr.Subroto Ganguly, Adv.For the respondent : Mr.Alok Banerjee, Adv.Mr.Nikhil Roy, Adv.Mr.S.M.Obaidullah, Adv.Mr.Partha Basu, Adv.Heard On : 2nd April, 2015 & 16th September, 2015 CAV On : 16th September, 2015 Judgment On : 26th November, 2015 Arijit Banerjee, J.: (1) In the present writ application the petitioner prays for a direction on the respondent authorities to provide him with a job under the National Coal Wages Agreement Scheme (in short NCWA Scheme).The petitioners case:(2) The petitioners father, Shiba Pada Goswami, was appointed as a General Mazdoor in 1978 by the Bharat Coking Coal LTD.(in short BCCL) at the Basantimata Colliery. On 6th February, 1998 the said Shiba Pada Goswami, a permanent employee of Basantimata Colliery, died in harness. (3) Since the petitioners father was the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
ORDER SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Special Jurisdiction [Income Tax].ORIGINAL SIDE ITA42of 2006 PAHARPUR COOLING TOWERS LTD.VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA-IV BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMITRA PAL The Hon'ble JUSTICE MIR DARA SHEKO Date : 19th November, 2015. Mr.J.P. Khaitan, Senior Advocate. Agnibesh Sengupta, Advocate. Mr.P.K. Bhowmick, Advocate. Soumitra Pal, J:- This Income Tax Appeal, pertaining to assessment year 1993-94, was admitted on the following substantial question of law: Whether on a true and proper interpretation of section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and, in particular, Explanation 1 thereto, any penalty can be imposed upon the appellant for making a claim that exchange gain made upon cancellation of a forward contract made in connection with acquisition of plant and machinery being imported for setting up a new factory was a capital receipt and purported findings of the Tribunal upholding the imposition of penalty and reversing the ord...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
ORDER SHEET GA3117of 2015 CS214of 2010 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE JASPAL SINGH CHANDHOK Versus SANDEEP PODDAR & ANR. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMEN SEN Date : 19th November, 2015. Appearance: Mr.Sakya Sen, Adv.Mr.A.Mondal, Adv.Mr.Rahul Karmakar, Adv.Ms.Debamitra Adhikari, Adv.Ms.Siddiqua Parveen, Adv.for the applicant/ respondents. Mr.Haradhan Banerjee, Adv.for the plaintiff. The Court : This is an application for rejection of the plaint. The plaintiff as co-owner of the property has filed a suit without impleading other co-owners either as co-plaintiffs or defendants. The plaintiff says that the plaintiff by ten several registered Deed of Conveyances all dated 15th December, 1990 acquired by purchase 10/12th share of the suit premises from the heirs and legal representatives of Nirode Bihari Lahiri. Thus, the plaintiff has become the owner and landlord of the premises in question. It appears from the plaint that the defendants ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION ORIGINAL SIDE Present : The Honble Justice Dipankar Datta W.P. No.887 of 2015 Shri Jagdish Sarda vs. State Bank of India & ors. For the petitioner : Mr. Kishore Dutta, Sr. Advocate, Mr. S.M. Akhtar, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. Joy Saha, Advocate, 1&2 Ms. Mekhla Kanji, Advocate, Mr. Shamit Sanyal, Advocate, Mr. Anirban Das, Advocate. Hearing concluded on : July 29, 2015 Judgment on : November 18, 2015 1. Sunbio Technology Limited, the third respondent, is a debtor of the State Bank of India, the first respondent, having committed default in repayment of dues in excess of ` 26 crore. The due repayment and discharge of the balance due and/or to become due under the credit facilities was secured, inter alia, by the personal guarantee of the petitioner who executed a Deed of Guarantee in his personal capacity on being approached by the third respondent for working capital credit limit to be accorded by the first responde...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
1 ORDER SHEET G.A.No.1100 of 2011 With E.C.No.90 of 2011 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL SIDE LALIT KR. BAGLA & ORS.Versus RAJIV KR. PODDAR & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMEN SEN Date: 16th November, 2015. Appearance: Mr.Ram Mohan Pal, Adv. for the petitioner Mr.Abhrajit Mitra, Sr.Adv.Mr.Satadeep Bhattacharya, Adv.Mr.S.S.Bhutoria, Adv. for the respondents The Court: This is an application by Pannalal Jadav and three others in an execution proceeding initiated by the plaintiffs/decree holdeRs.The case of the intervenors is that the predecessors in title of the intervenors were inducted by the Poddars in the year 1965 on the basis of a right given to the Poddars by the Bagla to create sub-lease. It is argued on behalf of the intervenors that the Poddars were originally the leasee for 25 yeaRs.commencing from 1941 and thereafter by reason of renewal in the year 1965, the Poddars being empowered to create sub-lease in favour of the predeces...
Tag this Judgment!