Court : Kolkata
ORDER SHEET WP No.579 of 2015 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE SAARTHAK VANIJYA INDIA LTD.& ANR. Versus THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA - I, KOLKATA & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE HARISH TANDON Date : 21st May, 2015. (Vacation Bench) Appearance: Mr.N.K.Poddar Sr.Adv.Mr.Vineet Tibrewal, Adv.Mr.Amit Agarwal, Adv..for the petitioneRs.Mr.Debasish Chowdhuri, Adv..for the respondents. The Court: This matter is moved in the Vacation Bench citing the urgency. In this writ petition the assessee/petitioner is challenging the order dated 15th November, 2014 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax, Kolkata - I, the respondent no.2 herein by which all the cases relating to the petitioner was transferred to New Delhi under Section 127 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. According to Mr.Poddar learned Senior Advocate for the petitioner the said order is invalid, illegal and suffers from incurable defects inasmuch as the same is passed in gros...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
C.S. No.254 of 2001 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction Amarnath Sanganaria Vs. Sonali Bank Ltd. & Ors. For the Plaintiff : Mr. S.K. Kapoor, Sr. Advocate Mr. D. Ghosh, Advocate Mr. R. Kapoor, Advocate Mr. P. Gorai, Advocate Mr. J.Pugalia, Advocate Ms. S. Bhakta, Advocate For the Defendants : Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Hearing Concluded on : May 06, 2015 Judgment on : May 15, 2015 S. Dutt, Sr. Advocate R. Ghosh, Advocate M. A. Jabbar, Advocate N. Khanjoy, Advocate DEBANGSU BASAK, J.The plaintiff seeks to recover damages from the defendants in this suit resulting out of execution of a contract for export. The plaintiff had entered into a tripartite contract for export of machineries to the second defendant with the first and the second defendants. The second defendant is a purchaser in Bangladesh. At the instance of the second defendant the first defendant had opened a Letter of Credit negotiable at any bank throughout India. The plaintiff claims to have negotiated th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Form No.J.(2) IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Civil Appellate Jurisdiction Original Side Present : The Honble Justice Ashim Kumar Banerjee And The Honble Justice Rajiv Sharma A.P.D.No.77 of 2015 C.S.O.S No.6 of 2014 With OCO No.1 of 2015 Pramila Saharia versus Mahesh Kumar Saharia and Another For the Appellant : Mr.Amitesh Banerjee, Advocate Mr.Sunil Singhania, Advocate For the Respondent On April 30, 2015 : Mr.Jayanta Kumar Mitra, Advocate General For the Respondent On May 14, 2015 : Mr.Jayanta Kumar Mitra, Advocate General & Senior Advocate Mr.Bilwadal Bhattacharya, Advocate & Senior Advocate Mr.Utpal Bose, Senior Advocate Mr.Sakya Sen, Advocate Ms.Sudeshna Bagchi, Advocate Ms.Debasree Dutta, Advocate Heard on : April 30, 2015 & May 14, 2015 Judgment on : May 15, 2015. ASHIM KUMAR BANERJEE, J. This appeal would relate to interpretation of a clause in the Deed of Trust. Pramila Saharia is the daughter-in-law of Late Ram Gopal Saharia who executed a Deed of Trust in 1960. The relevant cl...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
W.P.No.113 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction Original Side Rajendra Kumar Jain alias Lunia & Anr. versus The Kolkata Municipal Corporation & ORS.For the Petitioners For the Respondent No.4 For the Respondent No.5 For the K.M.C.Hearing concluded on Judgment on : Mr.Sarbapriya Mukherjee, Advocate Ms.S.Ganguli, Advocate : Mr.Mr.Mr.Mr.A.K.Mitra, Sr.Advocate A. Mitra, Sr.Advocate S. Banerjee, Advocate J. Mukherjee, Advocate : Mr.Mr.: Mr.Mr.Arindam Banerjee, Advocate A.N.Mukherjee, Advocate Barin Banerjee, Advocate Debangsu Mondal, Advocate : March 17, 2015 : May 14, 2015 DEBANGSU BASAK, J.:- The writ petitioners seek a direction on the respondent Nos.1, 2 and 3 to demolish the allegedly illegal construction at Premises No.6A, Hastings Park Road, Kolkata- 700027. Learned Counsel for the writ petitioners contend that, persons not competent to apply for sanction had obtained a sanction plan for construction at the rear portion of Premise Nos.31, Judges Cour...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
W.P.No.1105 of 2004 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction Original Side Abhishek Karnani versus Kolkata Municipal Corporation & ORS.For the Petitioner : Mr.Kishore Dutta, Sr.Advocate Mr.Sandip Ghose, Advocate Mr.Asim Kr. Chattopadhyay, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr.Biswajit Mukherjee, Advocate Mr.Gopal Chandra Bose, Advocate Hearing concluded on Judgment on : April 28, 2015 : May 14, 2015 DEBANGSU BASAK, J.:- Is the Corporation liable to refund the amount deposited with it under Section 197 of the Kolkata Municipal Corporation Act, 1980 with interest and if so, at what rate?. Such issue emanates from the factual matrix which is adumbrated hereafter. The petitioner is an assessee in respect of Property Tax payable under the Kolkata Municipal Corporation Act, 1980. The Hearing Officer, Kolkata Municipal Corporation by an Order dated March 14, 1996 had fixed an annual valuation of the property concerned. This annual valuation had resulted in a quantum of Prope...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
In The High Court At Calcutta Special Jurisdiction (Income Tax) Original Side ITA No.82 of 2004 ITA No.110 of 2005 ITA No.83 of 2004 ITA No.84 of 2004 CESC LTD.-Vs.C.I.T. II, Kolkata Before : The Honble Chief Justice Manjula Chellur & The Honble Justice Arijit Banerjee For the appellant : Mr.J.P. Khaitan, Sr.Adv.MRS.Nilanjana Banerjee Pal, Adv.For the respondent : MRS.Soma Chatterjee, Adv.Mr.R.N. Bandopadhyay, Adv.Heard On : 18th December, 2014 Judgment On : 14/05/2015 Arijit Banerjee, J.: (1) These income tax appeals arise out of an order dated 21st October, 2003 passed by the Income Tax Tribunal E Bench, Kolkata in ITA Nos.140, 141 and 142 (Kol)/02. By the order impugned the Ld. Tribunal dismissed the assessee companys appeals against three orders all dated 31st December, 2001 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (A) for the assessment years 1986-87, 1987-88 and 1989-90. (2) The facts of the case, briefly stated are that the assessee company (appellant herein) did not include the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction Original SIDE Present : The Honble Justice Soumen Sen GA No.2437 of 2014 CS No.284 of 2014 STARLIGHT REAL ESTATE (ASCOT) MAURITIUS LIMITED & ANR. versus JAGRATI TRADE SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED & ORS.For the plaintiffs : Mr.Surajit Nath Mitra, Sr.Adv., Mr.Deepak Jain, Adv.Mr.Suman Dutt Adv.For the defendant no.1/Applicant : Mr.Pratap Chatterjee, Sr.Adv., Mr.Ranjan Bachawat, Sr.Adv.Mr.Sanjay Ginodia, Adv., Mr.Manoj Kr. Tiwari, Adv.Mr.Ravi Kapur, Adv., Mr.Sarosij Dasgupta,Adv.Ms.Pubali Sinha Chowdhury, Adv.For the defendant no.2/Respondent no.2 : Mr.Jishu Saha, Sr.Adv., Mr.Amitesh Banerjee, Adv.Mr.Adtiya Garodia, Adv., Mr.Amitesh Roy, Adv.Heard on Judgment on :19.01.2015, 04.02.2015, 16.02.2015, 23.02.2015, 02.03.2015, 04.03.2015, 23.03.2015, 25.03.2015, 30.03.2015. : 18.02.2015, 18.03.2015, 14th May, 2015 Soumen Sen, J.:- This application has been filed by the defendant no.1, praying inter alia, for rejection of the plaint...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
ORDER GA No.1575 of 2015 CS No.117 of 2015 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction RADHA DEVI KARNANI Versus MAHENDRA KUMAR KARNANI BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMEN SEN Date: 14th May 2015. Appearance: Mr.Pratap Chatterjee, Senior Advocate Mr.Samrat Sen, Senior Advocate Mr.K.R. Thaker, Advocate Mr.A.Bagaria, Advocate ...for the applicant. Mr.S.N. Mitra, Senior Advocate Mr.Arindam Mukherjee, Advocate Mr.Deepak Kumar Jain, Advocate ...for the defendant. This is an application by the granddaughter of Indra Kumar Karnani, since deceased. The granddaughter apparently puts a claim that her grandmother, Radha Devi Karnani was so unwell and of frail mental condition that she could not have executed a deed of gift in the year 2012 and a deed of declaration in the year 2013. She says that the grandmother became aware of the said deed only on the eve of the Ramnavami day in the year 2015. In the petition it is stated that the disposition of the property by the deed of...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
ORDER SHEET ITA408OF2000IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Special Jurisdiction (Income Tax) ORIGINAL SIDE C.I.T.CENTRAL - II, CALCUTTA Versus KOTHARI PLANTATION & INDUSTRIES LTD.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE GIRISH CHANDRA GUPTA The Hon'ble JUSTICE ARINDAM SINHA Date : 14th May, 2015. For appellant : Mr.M.P.Agarwal,Advocate For Respondent/assessee : Mr.S.Das,Advocate The Court : The subject matter of challenge in the appeal is a judgement and order dated 22nd May, 2000 passed by the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal pertaining to the assessment year 1990-91 preferred by the revenue. The appeal was admitted on 3rd June, 2014 on the following grounds: For that the Tribunal erred in law holding that the replantation subsidy received by the assessee from Tea Board is to be taken into consideration for computing the profits of eligible business for the purpose of determining the deduction under Section 32AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961 notwithstanding the specific provisions contained in claus...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
G.A.No.109 of 2015 C.S.No.521 of 1992 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction Pasupati Dutta versus Smt. Kalpana Dutta & ORS.For the Plaintiff : MRS.Suparna Mukherjee, Advocate Mr.Amit Chatterjee, Advocate For the Defendants : Mr.H.Banerjee, Advocate Mr.S.Ray, Advocate Mr.Nayeemuddin Munshi, Advocate Mr.A.Chakraborty, Advocate Mr.A.Chowdhury, Advocate Mr.Animul Haque, Advocate Mr.Abul Mansoor, Advocate Hearing Concluded on : May 06, 2015 Judgment on : May 13, 2015 DEBANGSU BASAK, J. A preliminary decree dated July 24, 2014 has been passed in the present suit for partition. The plaintiff has applied for modification of such preliminary decree primarily on two grounds. The fiRs.ground being that the learned Counsel for the plaintiff was not heard on July 4, 2014 when the hearing of the suit was concluded. The second ground being that the dwelling house at Premises No.21, Girish Avenue, Kolkata- 700003 should be attempted to be partitioned by metes and bounds in...
Tag this Judgment!