Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: sashastra seema bal act 2007 section 6 enrolment Court: kolkata Page 13 of about 2,450 results (0.100 seconds)

Arindam Biswas Vs. Idbi Bank Limited and ors.

Court : Kolkata

..... s brief of documents disclosing the said documents in cours.of the day. the defendant bank has taken inspection of the said documents. all parties and the department are to act on a signed photocopy of this order on the usual undertakings. (soumen sen, j.) s.chandra/snn ar(cr) cs no.297 of 2007 in the high court at calcutta ..... of the plaintiff is the suit is fixed for examination of the second witness of the plaintiff, namely, the handwriting expert on 16th september, 2013. all parties concerned are to act on a signed photocopy of this order on the usual undertakings. (soumen sen, j.) sp/

Sarveshwari Mining (P) Ltd. Vs. the Official Liquidator, High Court, C ...

Court : Kolkata

..... returnable date. the official liquidator will act under the supervision of the secretary, department of mineral resources, vallabh bhawan, bhopal (m.p.).let a copy of this order be sent to the said secretary, department of mineral ..... collector and the superintendent of police of sutna to make available a body of police personnel at the disposal of the official liquidator of this court. this police personnel will act according to the directions of the official liquidator to ensure that there is no illegal mining. the district magistrate cum collector will file a compliance report regarding this before the .....

Coastal India Trading Systems Limited Vs. I.M.C. Limited

Court : Kolkata

..... account of retainers fees apart from the bills for reimbursement of the actual cost of travelling and stay of the representatives of the appellants while acting on their behalf, aggregating rs.76,40,182/-. appellant issued a notice of demand to the respondent. the respondent failed and neglected to pay despite issuing tds certificate issued for ..... [[[ ashim kumar banerjee, a.c.j.the parties to the above appeal entered into a contract in which the appellant was supposed to act as agent of the respondent to help them in giving appropriate advice and act as their agent for which they would claim retainer fees. the appellant would contend, a sum of rs.635583/- became due and payable on ..... form no.j.(2) in the high court at calcutta civil appellate jurisdiction original side present : the hon ble acting chief justice justice ashim kumar banerjee and the hon ble mr.justice arijit banerjee a.p.o.no.122 of 2014 c.p.no.12 of 2014 coastal india trading .....

M/S. J.P. Glass Industries and ors Vs. Pramode Kumar Nathani and ors

Court : Kolkata

..... agreement that could extend jurisdiction to the arbitrator. the arbitrator rejected such plea. the appellant challenged the said order before the learned single judge under section 34 of the act taking it as interim award. the learned judge, in our view, very rightly rejected such contention. we are of the view, the appellant at the threshold took the ..... of the apex court in the case of mcdermott international inc. versus burn standard co.ltd.which is quoted hereunder: 51. after the 1996 act came into force, under section 16 of the act the party questioning the jurisdiction of the arbitrator question before has the an obligation arbitrator. to such raise a the said question of jurisdiction ..... to be determined as a preliminary ground. a decision taken thereupon by the arbitrator would be the subject-matter of challenge under section 34 of the act. in the event the arbitrator opined that he had no jurisdiction in relation thereto an appeal thereagainst was provided for under section 37 of the .....

Coal India Limited Vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata

..... these tests. in our considered view, therefore, the assessee's claim regarding exclusion of the aforesaid amount under explanation (ii) to section 115ja(2) of the act is not sustainable in law. we donot also find any other enabling provisions for exclusion of this amount from book profits. once the assessee itself includes an amount ..... , should be satisfied is entirety and when the case fails even on one test, the exclusion clause will have no application.9. section 8 of the income tax act, which deals with the taxability of dividends, provides as follows : (a) any dividend declared by a company or distributed or paid by it ............. shall be deemed ..... dividends are declared, rather than income of the previous year during which these dividends are declared, distributed or paid - as is the scheme of the income tax act.therefore, the dividends reflected in the profit and loss account of the assessee donot constitute income of that previous year but are relatable to that previous year only .....

Coal India Ltd. Vs. Joint Commissioner of Income-tax

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata

Reported in : (2004)88ITD514Cal

..... both these tests.in our considered view, therefore, the assessee's claim regarding exclusion of the aforesaid amount under explanation (if) to section 115ja(2) of the act is not sustainable in law. we do not also find any other enabling provisions for exclusion of this amount from the book profits. once the assessee itself includes ..... the company, taxation of dividends in the hands of shareholders was no longer necessary and corresponding exemption of the same was introduced by inserting section 10(33) of the act, with effect from 1st april, 1998, which provided that 'any income by way of dividends referred to in section 115-o' shall not be included in total ..... dividends are declared, rather than income of the previous year during which these dividends are declared, distributed or paid - as is the scheme of the income-tax act.therefore, the dividends reflected in the profit and loss account of the assessee do not constitute income of that previous year but are relatable to that previous year .....

…plaintiff Vs. Sabitendra Nath Roy and Ors.

Court : Kolkata

..... special business which should include the draft resolution to be passed as ordinary or special resolution along with the explanatory statement pursuant to section 102 of the companies act, 2013. in the said annual general meeting, the defendant no.1 and other defendants along with the plaintiff passed resolutions approving annual accounts for the year ..... is maintainable?.2) whether the alleged receipt of the letter dated 16th september, 2014 of the plaintiff is fictitious?.3) whether the plaintiff has committed any act of forgery or fraud?.4) whether the defendants and the proforma defendant company are entitled to get relief as prayed for in their written statement filed on 26 ..... brevity. the question which fell for consideration before this court is as to whether there has been violation of provision of sections 102 and 196 of the companies act, 2013. before taking up the issues for discussion, it would be profitable to reproduce section 196 as under: 196.1) no company shall appoint or .....

Smt. Smriti Banerjee Vs. Tapan Kumar Banerjee

Court : Kolkata

Reported in : AIR1986Cal284

..... after the expiry of the period of one year after the passing of the decree for restitution of conjugal rights made under section 9 of the hindu marriage act 1955 (act 25 of 1955) the application for dissolution of marriage which has been filed has to be decreed if it is proved that there has been no restitution of ..... 4. thereafter on 24th of november. 1981 an application out of which the instant appeal has arisen was filed under section 13(1a)(ii) of the hindu marriage act 1955 in the court of the district judge at alipore for a decree for divorce by dissolving the marriage between the petitioner and the respondent-appellant on the ground ..... the petitioner's house in spite of the best attempts of the petitioner to bring her back. thereafter the petitioner made an application under section 9 of the hindu marriage act 1955 on 24th november, 1981, in the court of the additional district judge, alipore for restitution of conjugal rights. the said application was registered as matrimonial suit no .....

Sri Ranjit Sarkar Vs. Smt. Malati Ghosh

Court : Kolkata

..... : air1998sc3229 which no doubt says that the devise under a will amounts to assignment and therefore is not valid under section 21 of the karnataka land reforms act which prohibits subdivision or subletting of land held by a tenant or assignment of any interest thereunder. the hon'ble supreme court came to the said conclusion ..... 7. 13. mr. gupta further submitted that this restriction on transfer is not only imposed upon the transfer inter vivos contemplated under the transfer of property act but it extends to testamentary succession by will also and as such, such transfer though operates posthumously but nevertheless such transfer amounts to assignment which come into ..... submitting that thika tenancy right is not transferable in view of the provision contained in section 6(3) of the calcutta thika tenancy (acquisition and regulation) act, 1981 which provides that the interest of thika tenants and tenants of other land holding directly under the state under sub-section 1 of section 6 shall .....

Modern Food Industries (i) Limited Vs. Modern Bakery and ors.

Court : Kolkata

Reported in : 2006(4)CHN65,2007(34)PTC504(Cal)

..... to the finding recorded earlier in the order.27. mr. chatterjee further contended that the firm and its partners can take advantage of section 34 of the trade marks act, 1999. the said section does not define the meaning of the word 'continuously used'. in order to show that the said firm and its partners have continuously used ..... lay out, colour scheme of the label and/or packets in which the company sells its products which has been registered in favour of the company under the copyright act, 1957, has not been disclosed in the application, therefore, in the absence thereof, it cannot be said that the firm and its partners have infringed the artistic work ..... by it are not at all similar to the packets of the said company and/or in colourable imitation thereof. in view of section 34 of the trade marks act, 1999, the said company cannot interfere with or restrain the firm and its partners from manufacturing and selling bread under the trademark 'modern'.24. according to mr. chatterjee .....