Kolkata Court April 2015 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.
I. G. of Registration, Govt. of W. B. Vs. M/S. Cygnus Developers [Indi ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-27-2015
APO150OF2015CP1511986 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISIDICTION Original Side RE : DAS REPROGRAPHICS LTD.[IN LIQN.].AND I.G.OF REGISTRATION, GOVT. OF W.B.-VSM/S.CYGNUS DEVELOPERS [INDIA].PVT.LTD & ANR. BEFORE : The Hon'ble Justice BANERJEE The Honble Justice RAJIV SHARMA Date : 27.04.2015 Mr.Jayanta Kumar Mitra, learned Advocate General, Mr.Amitesh Banerjee, Advocate Mr.Tarak Karan, Advocate for the AppellantState. Mr.Jaydip Kar, Senior Advocate Mr.Mainak Bose, Advocate Mr.S.Sengupta, Advocate Mr.S.Ghosh, Advocate for the respondent no.1. Mrs.Ruma Sikdar, Advocate for the Official Liquidator, respondent no.2. The Court : This appeal would have a peculiar involvement of facts. Das Reprographics Limited had assets at Taratolla Road, Kolkata as well as at unit no.2, Biren Roy Road (West).Behala, Kolkata. The sale notice would depict, the property would be sold on as is where is basis. Accordingly, a public auction was held at the instance of the Official Liquidator. Efca...
Asha Murarka and Anr. Vs. The Kolkata Municipal Corporation and Ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-24-2015
W.P.No.814 of 2012 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction Original Side Asha Murarka & Anr. versus The Kolkata Municipal Corporation & ORS.For the Petitioners : Mr.N.K.Poddar, Sr.Advocate Mr.V.Tibrewal, Advocate Mr.A.Agarwal, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr.B.Mukherjee, Advocate Hearing concluded on Judgment on : March 12, 2015 : April 24, 2015 DEBANGSU BASAK, J.:- The writ petitioners have challenged the Orders dated March 27, 2012 and July 11, 2012 passed by the Corporation authorities refusing to grant 25 per cent and stating that the flat of the writ petitioners has been assessed on the date of the completion certificate. According to the writ petitioners they did not receive the Order dated March 27, 2012 and that the reasons given in the Order dated July 11, 2012 are contrary to the provisions of Sections 171(5) and 178(5) of the Kolkata Municipal Corporation Act, 1980. The writ petitioners claim that they are entitled to receive rebate as provided under...
Ajay Kumar Saraff and Anr. Vs. Sushil Kumar Agarwal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-24-2015
C.S.No.43 of 2005 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction Ajay Kumar Saraff & Anr. versus Sushil Kumar Agarwal For the Plaintiff s : Mr.M.S.Tiwari, Advocate Mr.S.K.Tiwari, Advocate For the Defendant : Mr.Amitava Das, Advocate Mr.Debdut Mukherjee, Advocate Hearing concluded on : April 08, 2015 Judgment on : April 24, 2015 DEBANGSU BASAK, J. The plaintiffs have filed the instant suit seeking specific performance of an agreement dated March 31, 1995 as modified on July 15, 2003. The agreement relates to flats lying and situate on the third and the fourth floors of Premises No.344, Canal Street, Kolkata- 700048. The defendant has filed a written statement and has made a counterclaim. In the counterclaim the defendant has sought relief with regard to recovery of possession of the flats on the third and the fourth floors of Premises No.344, Canal Street, Kolkata- 700048 and also perpetual injunction relating thereto and for other reliefs. The plaintiffs have not ap...
Cricket Association of Bengal and Ors. Vs. Calcutta Municipal Corporat ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-24-2015
W.P.No.2662 of 1996 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction Original Side Cricket Association of Bengal & ORS.versus Calcutta Municipal Corporation & ORS.For the Petitioners : Mr.Jaydip Kar, Sr.Advocate Mr.B.Basu, Advocate Mr.B.Bose, Advocate For Respondents : Mr.Pronab Kr. Dutta, Advocate MRS.Sima Chakraborty, Advocate Mr.Swapan Kr. Debnath, Advocate Mr.Swapan Chaudhuri, Advocate Hearing concluded on Judgment on : March 19, 2015 : April 24, 2015 DEBANGSU BASAK, J.:- The writ petitioners challenge the demand for advertisement tax made by the letter dated March 27, 1996 issued on behalf of the Kolkata Municipal Corporation authorities. The writ petitioners assail the demand notice primarily on three grounds. The fiRs.ground of challenge is that, the advertisement in question was within the Eden Gardens ground and since such ground was not a public place and the advertisement in the ground was not visible from a street or a public place, the provisions of Section 2...
C.I.T., Kolkataiii, Kolkata Vs. M/S. Britannia Industries Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-24-2015
ITA440OF2006IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Special Jurisdiction(Income Tax) ORIGINAL SIDE C.I.T., KOLKATA-III, KOLKATA Versus M/S.BRITANNIA INDUSTRIES LTD.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE GIRISH CHANDRA GUPTA The Hon'ble JUSTICE ARINDAM SINHA Date : 24th April, 2015. For Appellant/Revenue : Mr.M.P.Agarwal, Advocate For Assessee/Respondent : Mr.B.K.Murarka, Advocate Ms.Sutapa Roychowdhury, Advocate The Court: The appeal is directed against a judgement and order dated 19th May, 2006 passed by the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal pertaining to the assessment year 1998-1999. The revenue has come up in appeal. The following questions were formulated at the time of admission of the appeal: I . Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has erred in allowing expenditure of Rs.46,26,552/on development of machineries as revenue expenditure though the machineries developed were neither used for the business of the assessee nor sold ?. II. Whether, on th...
Manoj Kumar Singh Vs. New Hariyana Transport Company
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-23-2015
Form No.J.(2) IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Civil Appellate Jurisdiction Original Side Present : The Honble Mr.Justice Ashim Kumar Banerjee And The Honble Mr.Justice Shivakant Prasad A.P.O.No.235 of 2014 A.P.O.No.236 of 2014 C.P.349 of 2013 Manoj Kumar Singh versus New Hariyana Transport Company For the Appellant For the Respondent Heard on : Mr.Sakya Sen, Senior Advocate Mr.Aniruddha Mitra, Advocate Mr.Rohit Mukherjee, Advocate : Mr.Sailendra Jain, Senior Advocate Mr.S.N.Pandey, Advocate : April 10 & 16, 2015. Judgment on : April 23, 2015. ASHIM KUMAR BANERJEE, J. BACKDROP: Nampa Electricals Private Limited (hereinafter referred to as the said Company) engaged New Haryana Transport Company to act as their transporter. They were supposed to transport goods from various places on behalf of the company to the destination according to the instruction given by the company. Haryana Transport would claim, their four bills remained outstanding amounting to Rs.24,000, 11,000, 18,500 and 35,000...
Pawan Khaitan Vs. Rahul Commerce Private Limited
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-23-2015
Form No.J.(2) IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Civil Appellate Jurisdiction Original Side Present : The Honble Mr.Justice Ashim Kumar Banerjee And The Honble Mr.Justice Shivakant Prasad A.P.O.No.160 of 2015 C.P.No.1018 of 2014 Pawan Khaitan versus Rahul Commerce Private Limited For the Appellant : For the Respondent : Mr.Prantik Garai, Senior Advocate Mr.M.K.Kakrania, Advocate Mr.Rudraman Bhattacharya, Senior Advocate Mr.Emon Bhattacharya, Advocate Heard on : April 16, 2015. Judgment on : April 23, 2015. ASHIM KUMAR BANERJEE, J. This appeal would raise a short but interesting question as to whether a creditor by virtue of a decree obtained from a civil Court could apply for winding up of its judgment debtor without availing the process of execution. The learned Single Judge held, since the process of winding up was essentially discretionary in nature the creditor should approach the executing Court for execution of the decree. Being aggrieved, the creditor approached us by filing the appe...
Bagadiya Brothers Pvt. Ltd. and Anr. Vs. The Union of India and Ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-23-2015
WP1976of 2006 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE BAGADIYA BROTHERS PVT.LTD.& ANR. Versus THE UNION OF INDIA & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE DEBANGSU BASAK Date : April 23, 2015. Mr.Shyamal Sarkar, Sr.Mr.R.A.Agarwala, Ms.Nibedita Pal, Mr.Ramesh Dhara, Adv.Adv.Adv.Adv.Mr.Priyabrata Mukherjee, Adv.Mr.J.P.Chatterjee, Adv.The Court: The challenge in this writ petition is directed towards a letter dated November 3, 2006 issued by the Railway dated authorities September 29, disposing 2006 in of terms the of representation the order dated September 26, 2006. The Railway authorities are represented. Affidavit-in-opposition filed on behalf of the Railway authorities is kept on record. The writ petitioners had moved various railway rakes from mining areas to various ports between the period April, 2005 and July, 2006. The fiRs.writ petitioner had taken delivery of the goods. The Railway authorities have sought to impose punitive charges on the fiRs.writ...
Shome Nath Roy Chowdhury and Anr. Vs. The K.M.C.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-23-2015
WP597of 2004 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA ORIGINAL SIDE SHOME NATH ROY CHOWDHURY & ANR. Versus THE K.M.C.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE DEBANGSU BASAK Date : 23rd April, 2015. Mr.Jishnu Chowdhury,Advocate appeaRs.Mr.Nilay Sengupta,Advocate appeaRs.For KMC : Mr.Jugal Chandra Porel,Advocate Mr.Debangshu Mondal,Advocate The Court : - The challenge in the writ petition is directed against an order dated November 27, 2003 passed by the Special Officer (Building).Initially when the writ petition was heard it was submitted by the learned Counsel appearing for the writ petitioners that he required time to take instructions as to whether or not the writ petitioners would comply with the order impugned by paying the fine imposed. The writ petition was adjourned from time to time to allow the learned Counsel to obtain such instructions. Today the learned Counsel for the writ petitioners submits that the earlier prayer for adjournment was made on a mistaken appreciation of facts. The writ petitioner...
Commissioner of Income Tax, Siliguri Vs. Shri Shyamal Sarkar
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-22-2015
ORDER SHEET ITA NO.815 OF2008IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Special Jurisdiction(Income Tax) ORIGINAL SIDE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SILIGURI Versus SHRI SHYAMAL SARKAR BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE GIRISH CHANDRA GUPTA The Hon'ble JUSTICE ARINDAM SINHA Date : 22nd April, 2015. MR.M.P.AGARWAL, MR.P.DUDHERIA,ADVOCATES FOR APPELLANT MR.R.BHARADWAJ,ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT The Court: The subject matter of challenge in the appeal is a judgment dated 11th April, 2008 pertaining to the block period 1990-1991 to 2000-2001. The learned Tribunal held that the assessment was barred by limitation for the following reasons:- O n plain reading of the above section it is evident that the A.O.before exercising power u/s.142 (2A) should objectively consider the material available with him and reach a bona fide conclusion/opinion that special audit u/s.142(2A) is essential in view of complexity of accounts coupled with interest of Revenue. Before us, Departmental no such document Representative could wh...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »