Calcutta High Court Weekly Round-Up: August 12 To August 18, 2024

Nominal Index

Visa International Ltd. v Visa International Service Association & Anr. Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 182

Joyeeta Saha & Anr. -Vs- The State of West Bengal Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 183

Md. Abu Raihan v State of West Bengal & Ors. Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 184

Sashreek Constructors Private Limited vs. Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal Citation :2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 185

Pranabesh Sarkar versus Superintendent CGST & CX Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 186

Commissioner Of Customs (Preventive), West Bengal Versus Bangari Bhola And Others Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 187

[S.3(2) Trademarks Act] Associate Managers In Trademark Registry Not Empowered To Pass Quasi-Judicial Orders: Calcutta High Court

Case: Visa International Ltd. v Visa International Service Association & Anr.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 182

The Calcutta High Court has held that associate managers appointed under Section 3(2) of the Trademarks Act cannot pass quasi-judicial orders since they were not empowered to do so by virtue of their appointment as contractual employees.

A single bench of Justice Krishna Rao held:

The Registrar dealing with an application under the Trade Marks Act is a quasi judicial and delegation of power under sub-section (2) of Section 3 is an administrative power and as such the Associate Managers appointed under sub-section 2 of Section 3 are not empowered to pass quasi judicial orders.

[S.306 IPC] Momentary Disagreement Leading Person To Resort To Extremities Cannot Be Termed As Abetment To Suicide: Calcutta High Court

Case: Joyeeta Saha & Anr. -Vs- The State of West Bengal

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 183

The Calcutta High Court has recently quashed a case for abutment to suicide against a wife who was alleged of inducing her husband to commit suicide by failing to inform him of her previous marriage,

In quashing the charges against her, a single bench of Justice Ananya Bandopadhyay held:

Human psychology and mental state cannot be generally equated which varies from person to person. Egregious act on the part of a person from intractable emotions, depressions cannot be perceived or fathomed. One can be frenzied or hysterical even on minute and momentary disagreement resorting to extremities which cannot be termed as an instigation, inducement or abetment to commit suicide.

Child Care Leave Should Be Given To Both Male And Female Govt Employees, Family Responsibilities Must Be Shared By Mother & Father: Calcutta HC

Case: Md. Abu Raihan Vs State of West Bengal & Ors.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 184

The Calcutta High Court has directed that the benefit of child care benefit must be extended to both male and female employees and family responsibilities must be shared by the mother and the father.

In considering the case of a man who had two minor children and had lost his wife a few months ago, a single bench of Justice Amrita Sinha held:

"It appears that time has come when the Government should treat its employees equally without any discrimination between the male and the female employees. The responsibility of maintaining a family should be shared equally both by the mother and the father. Natural guardian of a Hindu minor under the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956 in the case of a boy or an unmarried girl is the father and after him the mother. The Government should take a decision to extend similar benefit to the male employees as has been done in the case of the females...to erase discrimination."

Direction For Payment Of Mandatory Pre-deposit Doesn't Constitute 'Order' Within Meaning Of Sec 35G of Central Excise Act: Calcutta High Court

Case Title: Sashreek Constructors Private Limited vs. Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal

Citation :2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 185

Taking note of Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, the Calcutta High Court clarified that an appeal shall lie to the High Court from “every order” passed in appeal by the Appellate Tribunal, though the maintainability thereof would be dependent on certain statutory limitations.

As per Section 35G of Central Excise Act, 1944, an appeal shall lie to the High Court from every order passed in appeal by the Appellate Tribunal on or after the 1st day of July, 2003 (not being an order relating, among other things, to the determination of any question having a relation to the rate of duty of excise or to the value of goods for purposes of assessment) if the High Court is satisfied that the case involves a substantial question of law.

GST Registration Shall Not Be Cancelled For Non-Filing Of Returns If Taxpayer Is Not Found Adopting Dubious Process To Evade Tax: Calcutta High Court

Case Title: Pranabesh Sarkar versus Superintendent CGST & CX

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 186

While pointing out that the suspension/ revocation of license would be counterproductive and works against the interest of the revenue, the Calcutta High Court clarified that assessee in such a case would not be able to carry on his business in the sense that no invoice can be raised by the assessee and ultimately would impact recovery of tax.

Single Bench of Justice Raja Basu Chowdhury therefore set aside the order cancelling the registration of the assessee subject to the condition that the assessee files his returns for the entire period of default and pays requisite amount of tax and interest and fine and penalty, if not already paid.

West Bengal Customs Commissioner Has Jurisdiction Over West Bengal And Sikkim: Calcutta High Court Upholds Seizure

Case Title: Commissioner Of Customs (Preventive), West Bengal Versus Bangari Bhola And Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 187

The Calcutta High Court has upheld the seizure and held that the Commissioner of Customs (Preventive), West Bengal, has jurisdiction over the whole of the States of West Bengal and Sikkim.

The bench of Chief Justice T.S. Sivagnanam and Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya has observed that if the Commissioner of Customs (Preventive), West Bengal, exercises jurisdiction over the whole of the States of West Bengal and Sikkim apart from the Union Territory of Andaman and Nicobar Islands, it cannot be said that merely because in Clause 10, the Principal Commissioner of Customs (Airport and Air Cargo Complex), Kolkata has been given jurisdiction over Netaji Subhas Chandra International Airport, that would denude the jurisdiction of the Commissioner of Customs (Preventive), West Bengal.