Calcutta High Court Weekly Round-Up 20th May To 26th May, 2024

NOMINAL INDEX

Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central-Iii, Kolkata Versus M/S. Vamshi Chemicals Ltd. 2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 127

Bharatiya Janata Party v All India Trinamool Congress & Ors 2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 128

AMAL CHANDRA DAS -VERSUS- THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND OTHERS 2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 129

X v State of West Bengal & Ors 2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 130

Uphealth Holdings Inc VS Glocal Healthcare Systems Pvt Ltd And Ors 2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 131

Saltee Productions Private Limited Vs. Indus Towers Limited 2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 132

M/S. Anurag Steel Enterprise Versus Commissioner Of Cgst & Central Excise, Howrah Cgst & Cx Commissionerate 2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 133

The Royal Bank Of Scotland N.V. @ Abn Amro Bank N.V. Vs Director Of Income Tax, International Taxation 2(1), Kolkata 2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 134

Padam Subba v State Of West Bengal 2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 135

Smt. Tara Devi & Anr. Vs. Bank of India & Ors. 2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 136

ORDERS/JUDGEMENTS

Share Application Money Or Repayment Doesn't Attract Penalty Section 269SS And 269T: Calcutta High Court

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 127

Case Title: Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central-Iii, Kolkata Versus M/S. Vamshi Chemicals Ltd.

The Calcutta High Court has held that if the share application money is neither a loan nor a deposit, then neither Section 269SS nor 269T of the Income Tax Act, 1961 shall apply. Consequently, no penalty, either under Section 271D or under Section 271E of the Income Tax Act, 1961, could be imposed.

The bench of Justice Surya Prakash Kesarwani and Justice Rajarshi Bharadwaj has observed that in cases of loans, it is ordinarily the duty of the debtor to seek the creditor and to repay the money according to the agreement. In other words, a loan grants temporary use of money or temporary accommodation under certain conditions.

[Lok Sabha Elections] Calcutta High Court Dismisses BJP's Appeal Against Order Restraining It From Running Allegedly Derogatory Ads Against TMC

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 128

Case: Bharatiya Janata Party v All India Trinamool Congress & Ors

The Calcutta High Court has dismissed an appeal by Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) against an order by a single judge which restrained it from printing certain allegedly derogatory advertisements against the Trinamool Congress (TMC) which violated the model code of conduct during the Lok Sabha Elections, 2024.

A division bench of Chief Justice TS Sivagnanam and Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharya held:

We are not inclined to entertain this appeal. The grievance is that they were not served or heard. It is submitted that the single bench's refer must be deleted and the appellant be allowed to present their submissions. can't test the correctness of the order based on submissions that were never placed before the single bench who did not get to hear the appellant. The appellant is not remediless and they can seek for recall or review.

BREAKING | Calcutta High Court Cancels OBC Certificates Issued In West Bengal After 2010, Scraps OBC Classification Of 37 Communities

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 129

Case No: AMAL CHANDRA DAS -VERSUS- THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND OTHERS

The Calcutta High Court on Wednesday cancelled all Other Backward Classes (OBC) certificates issued in West Bengal after 2010. The Court clarified that those who had attained employment on the benefit of the act and were already in service because of such reservation would not be affected by the order.

A division bench of Justices Tapabrata Chakraborty and Rajasekhar Mantha delivered the verdict in a plea challenging the process of granting OBC certificates in the state. The verdict is set to affect 5 Lakh OBC certificates. The Court said:

A class is declared as OBC not only because it is backward, based on scientific and identifiable data, but also on the basis of such class being inadequately represented in the services under the State. Such inadequacy is required to be assessed vis-a-vis the population as a whole including other unreserved classes. However, the pro format published by the Commission and as annexed to the writ petition (WP No.60 of 2011) does not conform to the provisions of the 1993 Act. There are deficiencies galore in the said pro format.

Calcutta High Court Directs POSH Committee To Reconsider WBNUJS Professor's Allegation Of Sexual Harassment Against Vice-Chancellor

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 130

Case: X v State of West Bengal & Ors

The Calcutta High Court has directed the local committee, 24-Parganas (North), constituted under the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 (in short, the Act of 2013) ("POSH Committee") to reconsider a complaint by a professor of NUJS Kolkata, accusing the University's Vice-Chancellor ('VC') of sexual harassment.

The POSH Committee in the impugned order, had dismissed the petitioner's complaint on the grounds that it was barred by limitation. 

Filing Information In Sealed Covers For Enforcement Of Arbitral Award Is Contrary To Natural Justice: Calcutta High Court

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 131

Case Title: Uphealth Holdings Inc VS Glocal Healthcare Systems Pvt Ltd And Ors

The Calcutta High Court bench of Justice Ravi Krishan Kapur held that the procedure of filing information in sealed covers for enforcement of arbitral award is contrary to the basic process of justice. It held that the concept of sealed covers also makes serious inroads into the principle of natural justice and fairness.

The bench held that:

“If the respondent was in the dark about the financial affairs of the petitioner prior to the filing of the application under section 9 of the Act, it is now sought to be kept in anxiety and suspense if the filing of sealed covers is permitted. There is no element of public interest nor national security involved in these proceedings. The parties are commercial men. The disputes raised between the parties are purely contractual. The underlying interests of both the parties is pure and simple money. In these commercial matters, there is no place for confidentiality nor privacy nor sealed covers.”

Time Spent From Award Correction And Delivery Of Signed Copy Of Order Should Be Excluded From The Period Of Limitation: Calcutta High Court

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 132

Case Title: Saltee Productions Private Limited Vs. Indus Towers Limited

The Calcutta High Court bench of Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya held that the starting point of limitation for setting aside an award in a case where a request under Section 33 of the Arbitration Act is made is the date of disposal of such request.

The bench held that the time spent from the date of disposal of such request till the signed copy of the order is delivered to the party shall necessarily stand excluded while calculating the period of limitation under Section 34(3) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

Retraction After A Period Of 3 Years And 9 Months Was Rightly Rejected By Commissioner Of Appeals: Calcutta High Court

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 133

Case Title: M/S. Anurag Steel Enterprise Versus Commissioner Of Cgst & Central Excise, Howrah Cgst & Cx Commissionerate

The Calcutta High Court bench of Justice Ravi Krishan Kapur held that the procedure of filing information in sealed covers for enforcement of arbitral award is contrary to the basic process of justice. It held that the concept of sealed covers also makes serious inroads into the principle of natural justice and fairness.

The bench held that:

“If the respondent was in the dark about the financial affairs of the petitioner prior to the filing of the application under section 9 of the Act, it is now sought to be kept in anxiety and suspense if the filing of sealed covers is permitted. There is no element of public interest nor national security involved in these proceedings. The parties are commercial men. The disputes raised between the parties are purely contractual. The underlying interests of both the parties is pure and simple money. In these commercial matters, there is no place for confidentiality nor privacy nor sealed covers.”

Letter By Joint Secretary Can't Override Plain And Unambiguous Provision Of Income Tax Act, 1961 And Finance Act: Calcutta High Court

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 134

Case Title: The Royal Bank Of Scotland N.V. @ Abn Amro Bank N.V. Vs Director Of Income Tax, International Taxation 2(1), Kolkata

The Calcutta High Court has held that the letter by the joint secretary cannot override the plain and unambiguous provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and the Finance Act.

The bench of Justice Surya Prakash Kesarwani and Justice Rajarshi Bharadwaj has observed that the letter of the Joint Secretary merely informs that “the matter has been looked into and the board is of the opinion that the tax rate applicable in the case of ABN AMRO BANK would be the same as for an Indian company at the relevant tax rate applicable for the concerned assessment years." The letter is a D.O. letter. It is not a circular issued in exercise of power conferred under Section 119 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Apart from that, the letter is in conflict with the plain and unambiguous provisions of the Act of 1961 and the Finance Act.

Undertrials Unable To Effectively Defend Themselves Due To Poor Socio-Economic Status, Leads To Sole Focus On Gravity Of Offence: Calcutta HC Reverses Death Sentence

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 135

Case: Padam Subba v State Of West Bengal

The Calcutta High Court has recently reversed a death sentence awarded to a man who was accused of brutally murdering a home-maker and her 13-year-old daughter with a sharp and heavy weapon.

A division bench of Justices Soumen Sen and Partha Sarathi Sen were adjudicating upon a death reference case wherein the trial court had handed a death sentence to Padam Subba (accused) who was a domestic help in the home of the mother-daughter duo whom he allegedly murdered. The Court stated that while the charge of murdering the mother had been proved against the accused, the charge of murdering the daughter had not been conclusively proven.

Employee Untraceable For Seven Year Should Be Presumed Dead, Heirs Entitled To Terminal Benefits: Calcutta High Court

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 136

Case Title: Smt. Tara Devi & Anr. Vs. Bank of India & Ors.

The Calcutta High Court single bench of Justice Rai Chattopadhyay held that in case an employee is untraceable for more than seven years and their death is presumed, the terminal benefits should be extended to the heirs of the employee.

The bench held that:

“This Court is of the view that having not denied service of the said missing person with the respondent Bank for years together the Bank cannot shut the doors on the face of his legal heirs when time comes for the Bank authorities to compensate adequately, the legal heirs of the person, in absence of the said person. The greater objective of supporting the family of an employee who may not be in a position to earn and support the family, cannot be sub-served for some technical reasons.”