[S.12A Commercial Courts Act] Pre-Institution Mediation Is Intended To Encourage Parties To Use Litigation As Last Resort: Calcutta HC

The Calcutta High Court bench of Justice Soumen Sen and Justice Biswaroop Chowdhury has held that the clear intent of Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 is to encourage parties to use litigation as a last resort and to resolve commercial disputes amicably, informally, cheaply and quickly under the process of mediation. Additionally, the court modified the interim relief to the effect that upon the appellant making payment of Rs.2 crores and filing an affidavit of assets and...

Calcutta High Court Directs South Eastern Railway To Refund Additional 20% Surcharge Levied On Consignment

The Calcutta High Court bench of Justice Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya and Justice Uday Kumar has held that an impugned judgment passed by the Railway Claims Tribunal, Kolkata whereby the appellant's claim for refund of 20% surcharge was refused is erroneous in law and perverse. Court said that the tribunal overlooked the obvious legal effect of the Circulars and Goods Tariff documents before it, which were the only documents which would have any bearing on the adjudication. Thus the court...

Power To Correct Computation Error U/S 33 Of Arbitration Act Can Be Exercised Suo Moto If No Application Is Filed Within 30 Days: Calcutta HC

The Calcutta High Court bench of Justice Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya has held that power to correct computation error in the award under section 33 of the Arbitration Act can be exercised suo moto by the Arbitral Tribunal when no application is filed to this effect within 30 days.Brief FactsA work order was awarded to the claimant by the respondent under which the claimant undertook to construct a road from Gholpukur to Tekhali Bridge and its maintenance. Dispute arose under the contract and the...

[Seat vs. Venue] Designated “Seat” Of Arbitration Has Exclusive Jurisdiction: Calcutta High Court Reiterates

The Calcutta High Court bench of Justice Soumen Sen and Justice Biswaroop Chowdhury has held that once the “seat” of arbitration is designated in an agreement, it is to be treated as the exclusive jurisdiction for all arbitration proceedings. The Court referred to the 'Shashoua Principle', which propounds that when there is an express designation of a "venue" and no alternative seat is specified, the venue is considered the juridical seat of arbitration.The arbitration clause in the loan...

Service Tax Liability Cannot Be Fastened On Implementation Of Govt Projects: Calcutta High Court

The Calcutta High Court has held that construction of canals/ pipelines/ conduits to support irrigation, water supply or for sewerage disposal, when provided to the Government, cannot be exigible to service tax. A division bench of Chief Justice TS Sivagnanam and Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya relied on two Circulars issued by the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs to observe, “Even in case of works contract, if the nature of the activities is such that they are excluded from...

[Arbitration Act] Section 8 Application Must Be Filed Before Or Simultaneously With Written Statement: Calcutta High Court

The Calcutta High Court Bench of Justice Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya and Justice Subhendu Samanta held that when no application for reference to arbitration under Section 8 of the Arbitration Act is made by either party, the civil court may very well entertain the suit and proceed with the adjudication of the same on merits in accordance with law. Also, the court held that the Trial Judge committed a patent error of law on both counts: first, the suit could not have been dismissed under...

Amendment In Finance Act Can't Retrospectively Affect Vested Right Of Taxpayer To Adjudicate Settlement Application U/S 245(D): Calcutta HC

The Calcutta High Court recently reiterated that when the settlement applications were filed before the date on which the Finance Act 2021 did not come into effect, then taxpayers had vested right of preferring the application in absence of any statute prohibiting the said application.The Division Bench of Justice Harish Tandon and Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya reiterated that retrospective legislation cannot affect the vested rights.The purport of Sec 245(C)(5) is not to make an application...

GST Department's Effective Adjudication Of Matter Cannot Be Scuttled By Seeking Writ Remedy: Calcutta High Court

While reiterating that it shall not interfere in matters requiring fact-finding and adjudication, which fall squarely within the statutory domain, the Calcutta High Court advised the manufacturer/ supplier to exhaust the statutory remedies provided under the CGST Act, 2017 including submitting a detailed response to the SCN.“The statutory framework under the CGST Act provides adequate mechanisms for addressing the petitioner's concerns, including responding to the SCN, participating in...

Remedy Under A&C Act Is In Addition To Remedies Under Special Statutes, But Once Elected Other Remedies Are Barred For Same Dispute: Calcutta HC

The Calcutta High Court bench comprising Justice Krishna Rao has observed that the remedy available under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 is in addition to the remedies available under other special statutes and the availability of alternative remedies is not a bar to the entertaining of a petition under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. But once elected, then the other remedy will not lie in respect of the same dispute. Brief Facts: The Defendant is a...

Regulatory Measures Under GST Laws Necessary To Prevent Tax Evasion, Not Violative Of Fundamental Right To Trade: Calcutta High Court

The Calcutta High Court has held that regulatory measures under the Goods and Services Tax Act cannot be labeled as violative of an assessee's right to trade/ business under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution. Justice Rajarshi Bharadwaj reasoned that such regulatory measures are “necessary to ensure compliance and prevent tax evasion”. The observation comes in a petition filed by an iron and steel trader, contending that the mismatch in the description of its goods seized during...

Order Passed U/S 11 Cannot Be Recalled If Valid Arbitration Agreement Exists To Justify Reference Of Parties To Arbitration: Calcutta HC

The Calcutta High Court bench of Justice Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya has held that an order passed under section 11 of the Arbitration Act on the basis of an arbitration clause cannot be recalled merely on the ground that reply given to a notice under section 21 was suppressed. Brief Facts The present application has been filed seeking recall of an order dated August 30, 2024 passed under section 11 of the Arbitration Act. The order is sought to be recalled on primarily three grounds: ...

[PMLA] Liberty Is Intrinsic To Rule Of Law, Court Cannot Be Restrained From Granting Bail On Account Of Restrictive Statute: Calcutta HC

The Calcutta High Court has granted bail to a man being investigated by the Enforcement Directorate under the PMLA for allegedly running a fake call centre and promising services to victims in exchange for money, which were never delivered. The alleged victims were from countries such as the US, UK, Germany, Australia, etc.Justice Suvra Ghosh held: The charge sheet of the scheduled offence does not name the victims who are undoubtedly the best persons to substantiate the allegations against the...