Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Reported in : (2005)96TTJ(Kol.)1041
1. These 4 appeals of the assessee relating to asst. yrs. 1992-93, 1993-94, 1994-95 and 1995-96 involving some common issues are disposed of by this consolidated order.2. The appellant is a branch of ABN AMRO Bank NV incorporated in Netherlands, with limited liability having its original office at Singapore. In India, the appellant is registered as a scheduled bank in terms of Schedule II of the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) Act, 1934. The main activities of the appellant in India comprise of accepting deposits, giving loans, discounting/collection of bills, issue of letters of credit/guarantees, executing forward transaction in foreign currencies for importers/exporters, money market lending/borrowings, investment in securities, etc., in terms of the existing rules and regulations governing such transactions. In the years under consideration, the appellant had three branches in India at Mumbai, Kolkata and New Delhi. There is an agreement between India and Netherlands for Avoidance of ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Reported in : (2008)112ITD57(Kol.)
1. This Special Bench has been constituted under Section 255(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by the Hon'ble President, I.T.A.T. in the case of M/s. I.T.C. Ltd. vide I.T.A. No. 1541 (Cal)/2000 for assessment year 1997-98 to consider the following questions: (1) That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Hon'ble CIT(A) has erred in deleting addition of Rs. 38,64,1091-debited to year's revenue account as value of stores written off by holding that it is for the A.O. to prove that consumable stores had either not been used or individually costed less than Rs. 5,0001-ignoring, in the process, the findings in assessment that claim could not be established on record. (2) That, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Hon'ble CIT(A) has erred in deleting addition of Rs. 5,00,000/- on account of building, furniture, fixture & fittings thereby contravening enunciation by the jurisdictional High Court to the defect that prohibition against guest house expenses s...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Reported in : (2008)115TTJ(Kol.)45
This Special Bench has been constituted under Section 255(3) of the IT Act, 1961 by the Hon'ble President, Tribunal in the case of M/s ITC Ltd. vide ITA No. 1541/Cal/2000 for asst. yr. 1997-98 to consider the following questions: (1) That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Hon'ble CIT(A) has erred in deleting addition of Rs. 38,64,109 debited to year's revenue account as value of stores written off by holding that it is for the AO to prove that consumable stores had cither not been used or individually costed less than Rs. 5,000 ignoring, in the process, the findings in assessment that claim could not be established on record. (2) That, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Hon'ble C1T(A) has erred in deleting addition of Rs. 5.00,000 on account of building, furniture, fixture and fittings thereby contravening enunciation by the jurisdictiorial High Court to the defect (sic-effect) that prohibition against guest house expenses stipulated in Section...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : 2007(4)CHN842
S.S. Nijjar, C.J.1. On 15th of March, 2007 this Court passed the following order:1(a). In addition to the order passed in this suo motu petition, there shall be a further order in this writ petition in terms of prayer clause '1':1) An interim order restraining the respondent Nos. 2 to 7 preventing the petitioner organizations other NGOs and voluntary aid organization from reaching Nandigram to provide assistance to injured and deceased villagers.1(b). We further direct the District Administration to ensure that the unclaimed dead bodies are handed over to the appropriate authorities and the identified dead bodies are handed over to the lawful claimants after due legal formalities have been concluded, such as post-mortem and inquest report, so that the relatives are able to perform the last rites of the deceased.IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTASpecial Jurisdiction (Contempt)In the matter of: The Court on its own Motion1(c). All the newspapers throughout the Nation have today carried as a l...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : 2008(2)CHN546
Pinaki Chandra Ghose, J.1. These writ petitions were filed as Public Interest Litigations challenging the acquisition proceedings in respect of about 1000 acres of land within the following mouzas, a) Gopalnagar, b) Singherbheri, c) Beraberi, d) Khaserberi and e) Bajemelia within the Police Station of Singur in the District of Hooghly.2. Such acquisition process has been challenged by the writ petitioners mainly on the ground that the said area of land is the source of livelihood of 10,000 agricultural households and destroying the most of fertile lands which cannot be replaced, apart from the other subsidiary industries.3. The writ petitioners challenged the entire acquisition process on the ground of mala fide and arbitrary intention and further for violating the provisions of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. It is further stated that for setting up a Small Car Project by Tatas would have been an acquisition of land following the Land Acquisition (Companies) Rules, 1963 (here...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : 2008(3)CHN857
Dipankar Datta, J.1. Rizwanur Rahman (hereafter Riz), since deceased, son and brother of the petitioners 1 and 2 respectively, was laid to rest in September last. The suspicious circumstances in which he died, the role of the State Police agencies in investigating the cause of his death, the conduct of certain police officers of Kolkata Police both before and after his death, alleged involvement of his father-in-law Ashok Todi (respondent No. 12) and his uncles-in-iaw Anil Saraogi (respondent No. 13) and Pradeep Todi (not a party to the petition) in connection with his unnatural death, investigation conducted by the Central Bureau of Investigation (hereafter the CBI) being directed by this Court - all these and much more, have exercised thoughtful consideration of this Court on the face of eloquent arguments advanced by learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner, the State, the accused police officers and the respondent No. 12 and learned Counsel for the CBI and the respondent No. 13, b...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Sanjib Banerjee, J.1. On the menu is a limited diagnosis of the state of health of the public healthcare in the State. A clutch of petitions challenges a government memorandum of June 12, 2009 and subsequent notices inviting tender for supply of cooked diet for indoor patients at State-run hospitals and like institutions. Most of the petitioners, including the ones in the first petition, are existing suppliers of cooked diet to Government hospitals; some of the other petitioners are not existing suppliers but, like the petitioners in the first petition, intended to put in their bids at the time that the petitions were instituted. The petitioners challenge the notification and the tender terms on two primary grounds: that the eligibility criteria set therein are absurd and mala fide and have no nexus with the work covered thereby; and, that the revised rates for supply of cooked diet to all Government-run hospitals are irrational and contrary to the observations found in at least one ea...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR2011SC1254
Bhaskar Bhattacharya, J.: 1. All these Mandamus Appeals were taken up together as in all these appeals, the different appellants have challenged the selfsame order passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court by which His Lordship allowed a writ-application in which prayer was made for a direction that the criminal investigation involved in the writ-application should be conducted by CBI and not by CID as per direction of the government. 2. Being dissatisfied with the aforesaid direction given by the learned Single Judge along with some other findings, all these appeals have been preferred by not only the different respondents of the writ-application but also the writ-petitioners whose grievance is that the learned Single Judge in addition to the aforesaid directions ought to have passed directions for initiating criminal proceedings against the respondents in the writ-petition in accordance with the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Sm. Lata Singh v. State of U.P and Anr...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata Appellate
1. Ambit and coverage of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 (hereafter the SICA) do not extend to a foreign company carrying on business in this country, is the point vehemently argued by learned counsel for each of the petitioners and some of the respondents herein while assailing the order passed by the Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction (hereafter the BIFR) sanctioning a scheme for revival of Baranagore Jute Company PLC (hereafter BJC), a company incorporated in England under the laws of that country and having its registered office in London. Per contra, each of the learned counsel for those respondents who have urged the Court not to entertain the writ petitions have strongly contended that on proper interpretation of SICA, it ought to be held that the ambit and coverage of SICA extends to embrace a foreign company, a fortiorari, BJC. 2. The writ proceedings presently under c...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata Appellate
1. The following questions have been raised by the petitioner :-a) whether a Magistrate can issue process against an accused after filing of charge-sheet who was discharged earlier under Section 167(5) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, i.e., before filing of the charge-sheet;b) whether the petitioner is a public servant within the meaning under Section 21 Indian Penal Code by virtue of Section 8 of the West Bengal Co-operative Societies Act, 1983;c) if so, whether he is to be tried for an offence under Section 420 I.P.C. only by a Special Court as provided under Section 4 of the West Bengal Criminal Law (Amendment Act) Act 1949, (Act 21 of 1949).2. Mr. Somopriya Chowdhury, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits in respect of his first contention that once an accused has been discharged, the Magistrate cannot take cognizance against him by way of review or recalling of that order. To draw support to his contention, Mr. Chowdhury refers to the decision of the Honble Apex ...
Tag this Judgment!