Calcutta High Court Weekly Round-Up 21st April-28th April 2024

NOMINAL INDEX

Baishakhi Bhattacharyya (Chatterjee) & Ors. Vs. State of West Bengal & Ors. 2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 94

The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, (Central) -2, Kolkata Versus M/S. BST Infratech Limited 2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 95

Md. Farid Vs. Union of India & Ors 2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 96

Dhansar Engineering Company Pvt Ltd v. Eastern Coalfields Ltd 2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 97

Kashmira Khan Vs. The West Bengal State Election Commission & Ors 2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 98

Ashish Kumar Sharma Versus The Deputy Commissioner, State Tax, Bureau Of Investigation, South Bengal, Howrah Zone And Others 2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 99

State Cabinet Knowingly Protected Fraudulent Appointments: Calcutta High Court Invalidates Nearly 24,000 Teaching, Non-Teaching Jobs

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 94

Case: Baishakhi Bhattacharyya (Chatterjee) & Ors. Vs. State of West Bengal & Ors.

The Calcutta High Court invalidated almost 24,000 teaching and non-teaching jobs across government and aided schools, which were filled up as a result of the 2016 SSC Recruitment process, which was subsequently challenged due to the cash-for-jobs recruitment scam.

In a detailed order running into more than 280 pages, a division bench of Justices Debangsu Basak and Md Shabbar Rashidi cancelled the entire panel of the 2016 SSC Recruitment upon finding irregularities with OMR sheets and ordered the state to conduct fresh examinations for the same.

The Bench also directed those whose appointments had been cancelled to return all salaries and benefits drawn by them as they were rendered to be "proceeds of crime" due to the fraudulent nature of their appointment.

Assessee's Failure To Establish Genuineness Of Transaction With Cogent And Credible Evidence, Calcutta High Court Upholds Addition

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 95

Case Title: The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, (Central) -2, Kolkata Versus M/S. BST Infratech Limited

The Calcutta High Court has held that merely proving the identity of the investors does not discharge the onus on the assessee if the capacity or credit worthiness has not been established.

The bench of Chief Justice T.S. Sivagnanam and Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya has observed that the assessee has not established the capacity of the investors to advance money for the purchase of the shares at a high premium. The credit worthiness of those investors' companies is questionable, and the explanation offered by the assessee, at any stretch of imagination, cannot be construed to be a satisfactory explanation of the nature of the source.

Employee Entitled To Interest On Withheld Gratuity Amount On Acquittal In Criminal Proceedings: Calcutta High Court

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 96

Case Name- Md. Farid Vs. Union of India & Ors

A Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court comprising of Justice Tapabrata Chakraborty and Justice Uday Kumar while deciding a Writ Petition in the case of Md. Farid Vs. Union of India & Ors has held that an employee is entitled to interest on the withheld amount of gratuity upon acquittal in the criminal proceedings pending against him on the date of his retirement.

A Policy Circular Requiring Further Consent For Arbitration Cannot Be Construed As An Arbitration Clause: Calcutta High Court

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 97

Case Title: Dhansar Engineering Company Pvt Ltd v. Eastern Coalfields Ltd, RVWO No. 38 of 2023

The High Court of Calcutta has held that a policy circular issued by a parent company contemplating arbitration would not be an arbitration agreement if it requires fresh consent of the contractor to refer the dispute to arbitration.

The bench of Justice Ravi Krishan Kapur held that when for existing contracts, the circular required consent of the contractor for reference to arbitration, it cannot be construed to be an arbitration agreement as it would require a fresh arbitration agreement to be executed between the parties prior to reference of dispute to arbitration.

The Court held that a circular expressing desire for arbitration would not be construed as an arbitration clause unless a definite agreement is not executed between the parties pursuant to such expression of desire.

Democracy Can't Be Looted By Muscle Power, Country Run On Public Mandate: Calcutta HC Sets Aside 2023 Gram Panchayat Election Result Over Ballot Snatching

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 98

Case: Kashmira Khan Vs. The West Bengal State Election Commission & Ors

The Calcutta High Court has recently set aside the election result of the gram panchayat election of Sankrail, West Bengal which was held in 2023 over allegations of 'merciless beating', 'violence' and ballot snatching by hooligans belonging to the ruling dispensation during the counting of votes.

A single bench of Justice Amrita Sinha also cancelled the election certificate of the returned candidate, directed the seat to be treated as vacant, and asked the Election Commission to take steps for holding fresh elections. The Court stated:

The Commission ought to take bold steps to uphold the goal and value of democracy and not let antisocial elements and hooligans trample democracy right under its nose. When the offence came to the knowledge of the machineries of the Commission, then prompt necessary action to stall the counting process was the only remedy to prevent miscarriage of justice.

GST Dept. Can't Compute Penalty Amount On Higher Value Than Invoice Value Without Proper Evidence: Calcutta High Court

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 99

Case Title: Ashish Kumar Sharma Versus The Deputy Commissioner, State Tax, Bureau Of Investigation, South Bengal, Howrah Zone And Others

The Calcutta High Court has held that the GST department cannot compute the penalty amount on a higher value than the invoice value without proper evidence and reason.

The bench of Chief Justice T.S. Sivagnanam and Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya has observed that a transporter or owner of the goods is bound to carry certain documents as mentioned in the Act that are to accompany the goods. In the instant case, prior to the movement of the goods, an e-way bill was generated in which the tax invoice number was duly incorporated. Proof of payment of tax has also been established, and the e-way bill was valid until September 5, 2022. The mistake committed by the appellant was not extending the e-way bill after its expiration, despite such liberty being granted under the Rules.