Calcutta High Court
Calcutta High Court Injuncts State Govt, WBIDC From Disposing Of Property In KMC Area Over Essex Arbitral Award Case
The Calcutta High Court bench of Justice Shampa Sarkar has injuncted the West Bengal Government and WBIDC from disposing of subject matter of the Award in the execution petition filed by the award-holder in Essex case.Background:This execution petition stems from a dispute under a Share Purchase Agreement (SPA) which was signed between between Essex Development Investments (Mauritius) Limited (Essex), the Government of West Bengal (GoWB), and West Bengal Industrial Development Corporation...
Scrutiny Notice Was Issued In Amalgamating Company's Name Despite Dept Knowing Of Amalgamation: Calcutta HC Declines To Apply S.292B Of Income Tax Act
The Calcutta High Court has refused to apply Section 292B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 to a scrutiny notice issued in an amalgamating company's name, despite the Assessing Officer being aware about the company's amalgamation. Section 292-B provides that no notice or assessment or any proceedings can be deemed to be invalid merely for the reason of any mistake, defect or omission in such notice, assessment or other proceedings. In the case at hand, a division bench of Chief Justice ...
Factual Examination Of Dispute Regarding 'Addition' Of Unexplained Cash Credit U/S 68 Of IT Act Is Beyond Scope Of Appeal U/S 260A: Calcutta HC
The Calcutta High Court has held that it cannot indulge in factual examination of the material produced or not produced by an assessee-company to explain the share capital and premium received by it, in an appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act. A division bench of Chief Justice T.S. Sivagnanam and Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya thus refused to interfere with an ITAT order which deleted additions made by the Assessing Officer towards “unexplained” share capital and share...
Award In Which Vital Evidence Are Not Considered Can Be Set Aside On Grounds Of Patent Illegality U/S 34: Calcutta HC
The Calcutta High Court bench of Justice Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya affirmed that there cannot be any quarrel with the proposition that if there is a perversity in the award insofar as the non-consideration of vital evidence is concerned, the same tantamounts to violation of the fundamental policy of Indian Law as well as gives rise to a patent illegality, which is a sufficient ground for interference under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act. Brief Facts AP-COM No. 334 of 2024 has been...
Composite Reference May Be Made When Two Contracts Are So Intertwined That Separate Arbitral Proceedings Would Prejudice Parties: Calcutta HC
The Calcutta High Court Bench of Justice Sabyasachi Bhattacharya affirmed that when two or more contracts are so intertwined with each other so as to prejudice the parties should separate arbitrations be held, a composite reference of both the contracts can be made to the Arbitrator. Brief Facts The present application under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 arises out of a dispute pertaining to two different agreements between the parties. The first agreement,...
Deduction U/S 80-IA Is Eligible For Industrial Undertakings Even If Infrastructural Development Is Performed With State's Nodal Agency: Calcutta HC
The Calcutta High Court recently confirmed the deduction u/s 80IA(4) to an Infrastructural development company, regarding development of a mechanised port handling system by entering into an agreement with a nodal agency recognised by the Andhra Government. The Division Bench comprising Chief Justice T.S. Sivagnanam and Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya observed that deduction u/s 80IA(4) is legislated to promote industrial undertaking engaged in the infrastructural development, and ...
Arbitral Tribunal Acted With Patent Illegality, Against Indian Law In Awarding Reimbursement Of Service Tax Along With Interest: Calcutta High Court
The Calcutta High Court Bench of Justice Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya observed that award passed by Arbitral Tribunal was tainted with patent illegality and contravened the fundamental policy of Indian law. The award was challenged under section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act (act). The court set aside the award in which South Eastern Railway (railway) was directed to reimburse the respondent towards service tax and interest. Brief Facts The dispute emerged from the contract...
S.107 CGST Act | Appellate Authority Cannot Suo Moto Enhance Tax Liability: Calcutta HC
The Calcutta High Court recently set aside an order of the GST Appellate Authority, suo motu enhancing tax liability on an assessee, without following the procedure under Section 107(11) of the CGST/ WBGST Act.Section 107 of the Act prescribes procedure for filing and adjudication of appeals by the Appellate Authority. Sub-section 11 thereof stipulates that the Appellate Authority can confirm, modify or annul the order appealed against, provided that an order enhancing any fee/ penalty/ fine...
90-Day Timeline In Section 18(5) Of MSME Act Is Directory : Calcutta High Court
The Calcutta High Court bench comprising Justice Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya has held that the 90-day timeline for completion of the arbitral proceeding under Section 18(5) of the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 (MSME Act) is directory, not mandatory, and does not terminate or affect the validity of mandate of the MSME Facilitation Council as Arbitrator. It further held that the Court does not have jurisdiction to substitute the Council or its nominee by another...
Calcutta High Court Upholds Rs. 780 Crore Arbitration Award In Favour Of Reliance Infrastructure, Refuses Pre Award Interest
The Calcutta High Court division bench, comprising Justice I. P. Mukerji and Justice Biswaroop Chowdhury, has upheld the arbitral award amounting to Rs 780 crore in favour of Reliance Infrastructure Limited, with the exception of relief on pre-award interest and reduction in the rate of interest on bank guarantee. The court observed that the grant of pre-award interest was patently illegal, thereby, setting aside the interest awarded for the period prior to the award date.Facts:Three agreements...
Compliance With Pre-Arbitration Formalities Not Mandatory; Can Be Waived By Consensus: Calcutta High Court
The Calcutta High Court bench comprising Justice Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya has held that compliance of the pre-arbitration stages can be waived by consensus. The court observed that forcing the petitioner back to the rigmarole of pre-arbitration formalities would be an unnecessary and futile exercise.Brief Facts:The petitioner, Jayashree Electromech Private Limited, was awarded six letters of contract by the respondent, West Bengal State Electricity Transmission Company Limited for the...
Enterprise Contracting With Assignee Of Govt Recognised Concessionaire For Developing “Infrastructural Facility” Can Claim Deduction U/S 80IA(4) Of Income Tax Act: Calcutta HC
The Calcutta High Court has held that an enterprise contracting with the assignee of a government recognised concessionaire for infrastructure development can, based on facts and circumstances of the case, be given the benefit of deduction under Section 80IA(4) of the Income Tax Act 1961.The provision prescribes deductions in respect of enterprises engaged in infrastructure development. Sub-section (b) of the provision stipulates that the enterprise claiming deduction must have entered into an...