Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Mar-03-2014
ORDER SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Special Jurisdiction [Income Tax].ORIGINAL SIDE GA No.1333 of 2013 ITAT No.100 of 2013 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA-IV, KOLKATA Versus M/S.AKZO NOBEL INDIA LIMITED (Formerly known as Akzo Nobel Coatings India Private Limited) BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE GIRISH CHANDRA GUPTA The Hon'ble JUSTICE SUDIP AHLUWALIA Date : 3rd March, 2014. For Appellant : For Respondent : Mr.P.Dudharia, Advocate Mr.R.N. Bajoria, Senior Advocate with Mr.A.Gupta and Mr.A.Mazumder, Advocates The Court : The subject matter of challenge in this appeal is a judgment and order dated 14th September, 2012 passed by the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Banglaore Bench in ITA Nos.175 to 755 & 1131/Bang/2010 and ITA No.349/Bang/2011. The appeal preferred by the revenue was admitted by an order dated 2nd July, 2013. The appeal was thereafter taken up for hearing by us. The appeal, as a matter of fact, was heard. Today when the matter was taken up for further hearing, M...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Apr-10-2014
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 Arijit Banerjee A.P.D.No.213 of 2005 C.S.No.616 of 1990 Smt. Amala Palit & Anr. versus Smt. Ratna Bose & ORS.For the Appellant : Mr.Deba Prasad Bhattacharya, Advocate Mr.Bidyut Kumar Banerjee, Advocate For the Respondent : Mr.Joydip Kar, Advocate Mr.Anirban Kar, Advocate Mr.Suvadeep Sen, Advocate Heard on : Judgment on : April 10, 2014 March 20, 21, 25, 26 & April 1, 2014 ASHIM KUMAR BANERJEE, J. FACTS: Subject property being premises No.24A Balaram Ghosh Street Calcutta was an old building at North Calcutta owned by Mukherjee family. By registered Deed of Lease dated July 25, 1964 Mukherjees leased out a portion of the said building being open and vacant courtyard at the back portion of the building for twenty one years in favour of the appellants. The lease expired by efflux of time in July 1985. As a condition of the lease, t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Aug-26-2014
GA No.192 of 2012 EC No.517 of 2011 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction SREI EQUIPMENT FINANCE PVT LTD.(SEFPL) Versus PEDDIBABU VENKATRAO GUBBALA & ANR. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMEN SEN Date : 26th August, 2014. Appearance: Mr.Utpal Bose, Sr.Adv.Mr.Swatarup Banerjee, Adv.The Court : In spite of ordeRs.none appears on behalf of M/S.Noble Enterprises who claims that they are the owners of the cranes. The documents produced by Mr.Utpal Bose, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the decree-holder, show that the said cranes are hypothecated to the decree-holder. The report filed by the Receiver shows that the said cranes are lying in the go-down of M/s.G.S. Shetty and Sons at Kolke, Mumbai, Pune Highway. The owner of the go-down of M/s.G.A. Shetty and Sons is directed to produce and hand over the cranes to the Receiver who shall after taking possession of the cranes keep them in his custody at a place to be provided by the decree-holder. In case...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Apr-08-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION GA No.2404 of 2012 GA No.2778 of 2012 CS No.268 of 2012 SUDHA KHEMKA AND ANOTHER -VERSUS- CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA AND OTHERS For the Plaintiffs: Mr Mr Mr Mr Pratap Chatterjee, Sr Adv., Reetobrata Mitra, Adv., Manik Das, Adv., Rudrajit Sarkar, Adv.For the Defendant No.1: Ms Usha Doshi, Adv.For the Defendant No.2: Mr Hirak Mitra, Sr Adv., Mr Arun Geetesh, Adv., Ms Nilanjana Adhya, Adv., Mr Rishav Medora, Adv.For the Defendant No.3: Mr Anuj Singh, Adv., Mr S.E.Huda, Adv., Mr Sounak Sengupta, Adv., Ms Purnima Nath, Adv., Mr Lucky Mukherjee, Adv.Hearing concluded on: April 2, 2014. BEFORE SANJIB BANERJEE, Judge Date: April 8, 2014. SANJIB BANERJEE, J. : Nostalgia may have no place in a judgment, but it may be excusable to lament the extinction of a few legal axioms in the wake of the new laws that now come in faster than one can make it count and, often, unmindful of the manner of implementation thereof. What remains unchange...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : May-20-2014
ORDER SHEET GA No.1600 of 2014 APO No.177 of 2014 WP No.353 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE M/S.MERCURY EXPORTERS AND MANUFACTURING P. LTD & ANR Versus PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK AND ANR BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SANJIB BANERJEE The Hon'ble JUSTICE SUDIP AHLUWALIA Date : 20th May, 2014. (Vacation Bench) Appearance: Mr.Debnath Ghosh, Adv.Mr.C.K.Dutta, Adv.Mr.Provat Sil, Adv.for the petitioneRs.Mr.Siddhartha Banerjee, Adv.Mr.Victor Datta, Adv.for the respondents. The Court : The appeal is directed against an order of May 6, 2014 by which the writ petition has been dismissed on the ground that the petitioners remedy under Section 17 of Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 would be available at the appropriate stage. The writ petition was directed against a notice dated February 22, 2010 issued by the bank in exercise of its authority under Section 13(4) of the said Act. 2 The b...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Oct-31-2014
EC No.526 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction SREI EQUIPMENT FINANCE LTD.Versus A .B.ASSOCIATES & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMEN SEN Date : 31st October, 2014. Mr.Satarup Banerjee, Adv.appears The Court : The offers received by the Receiver have been duly communicated to some of the judgment-debtORS.The principal judgment- debtor appears to be the judgment-debtor no.1. He has received the notice and the offers received by the Receiver. The offers are placed before this Court. Since no other offers save and except the offers stated in the report have been received and there is no other intending purchaser offering a higher price than what is stated in the report, the sale is confirmed as follows: Sl. No.Engine Number Name of the Purchaser Offer Value (Rs.) 1. B5.91803101L6295 4664 B5.91803101L6295 3878 Sanjay Kumar Padhy of Nayapalli, Bhubaneswar; EMD of Rs.1 Lakh 14 Lakh 3. B5.91803101L6295 4725 Narinder Singh of Jagnath Vihar, Barmunda; R...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Jun-25-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction Original Side Present: The Honble Justice Arindam Sinha W.P.No.1936 of 1995 India Trident Maritime PVT.LTD.& ORS.Vs The Board of Trustees for the Port of Calcutta & ORS.For the Petitioner For the Respondents : Mr.Tilak Kr. Bose, Sr.Adv.Ms.Nilanjana Adhya, Adv.: Mr.S.K.Roychowdhury, Adv.Ms.Kumkum Das(Dutta).Adv.Heard on : 05.06.2014 and 10.06.2014. Judgment on : 25th June, 2014. Arindam Sinha, J. The petitioners being steamer agent and shipowner had by this writ petition prayed for issuance of mandamus upon the Kolkata Port Trust and Customs to forthwith release 78 containers belonging to them upon allocating suitable space for storage of the cargo contained therein and for refund of ground rent debited to their marine account. By order dated 12th February, 1996 of this court the said two Authorities were directed to allow the petitioners to de-stuff the cargo in the 78 containers within one week therefrom and, thereafter, t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Aug-18-2014
GA No.2400 of 2014 CSOS No.5 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction MRS.ASHA PAUL Versus THE LEE MEMORIAL MISSION BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMEN SEN Date : 18th August, 2014. Appearance: Mr.Dhruba Ghosh, Adv.Ms.Chama Mookerjee, Adv.The Court : This is an application by one Stephen Sardar and Satyajit Roy, claiming themselves to be the member of Methodist Church of India. Although the petitioners ostensibly professed a greater cause but in reality they are espousing their personal cause in conflict with the much bigger consideration of a noble cause. They are trying to protect their possession in the property. It appears that in the application in which the order was passed on 13th June, 2014, a case was made out for sale of the property in question in order to help the Mission to cope with its financial crisis as well as help in establishment of a unit of Calcutta Boys School in that area. The said application was in the nature of an application ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Sep-09-2014
ORDER SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Special Jurisdiction (Income Tax) ORIGINAL SIDE ITAT No.72 of 2014 G.A.No.1783 of 2014 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL II KOL. Versus CEMENT MANUFACTURING Co.LTD.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMITRA PAL The Hon'ble JUSTICE DEBANGSU BASAK Date : 9th September, 2014. Mr.R.N.Bandopadhyay, Advocate Mr.J.P.Khaitan, Sr.Adv.Mr.Siddhartha Das, Advocate The Court : A preliminary objection has been raised by Mr.J.P.Khaitan, learned Senior Advocate that the order passed by the learned Tribunal at Guwahati is subject to the jurisdiction of the Gauhati High Court since the assessment for the concerned previous year reached its finality in another State over which the Tribunal and the High Court of that State has jurisdiction. The jurisdiction of this Court cannot be stretched to the Tribunal in another State when the matter had reached finality in the other State. Since Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 provides that an appeal shall lie to the Hi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : May-15-2014
ORDER SHEET W.P.397 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE M/S.KRISHNA SHIPPING AGENCY AND ANR. Versus COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (AIRPORT & ADMN).ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE HARISH TANDON Date : 15th May, 2014. Appearance : Mr.Pranab Dutta, Adv.Mr.Biswajit Mukherjee, Adv. for the petitioner Mr.R.Bharadwaj, Adv.MRS.Santa Mitra, Adv. for the respondent. The Court : The order in original dated 23rd of April 2014 passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Airport and Administration).Customs House, Kolkata under regulation 22 of the Customs House Agents Licensing Regulations 2004 is assailed by the petitioner in this writ petition primarily on the ground of violation of principles of natural justice and non adherence of the procedure required by the disagreeing with the enquiry report. disciplinary authority while The authority granted a licence to the petitioner to the act as customs aforesaid house regulation. agents The under the commissioner R...
Tag this Judgment!