Parties' Conduct Overrides Clause: Calcutta High Court Rejects Literal Interpretation Of Arbitration Venue Clause

The Calcutta High Court on Tuesday dismissed Chittaranjan Locomotive Works' application for an unconditional stay of an arbitral award dated March 14th, 2024. Justice Shampa Sarkar on 2nd December, 2025 ruled that the conduct of the parties and arbitrator and the award publication proceedings in Kolkata constituted “contrary indicia”, sufficient to displace Chittaranjan as the contractual venue. The controversy stems from a tender issued by the Railway Administration, Chittaranjan...

Income Tax Act | S. 153C Proceedings Unsustainable Without Incriminating Material Found In Search: Calcutta High Court

The Calcutta High Court has held that proceedings under Section 153C of the Income Tax Act cannot be initiated unless incriminating material relating to the assessee is found during a search and both the assessing officers (the Assessing Officer of the searched person as well as the Assessing Officer of the person other than the searched person) record the necessary satisfaction.Section 153C of the Income Tax Act contains a special provision relating to the assessment of 'other person', pursuant...

Income Tax Act | Refund Can't Be Withheld U/S 245 Unless Department Establishes Tax Liability: Calcutta High Court

The Calcutta High Court stated that the Income Tax Department cannot withhold a refund under Section 245 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, unless it establishes tax liability. The Bench of Justice Raja Basu Chowdhury observed that it is true that Section 245 of the said Act authorises the Income Tax Department to set off a refund against remaining tax payable. Unfortunately, in this case, the respondent has not been able to demonstrate that any amount is payable or is due from the...

IGST ITC Declared In GSTR-9 Can Be Set Off Against Tax Demand If Missed In Monthly GSTR-3B: Calcutta High Court

The Calcutta High Court has stated that IGST (Integrated Goods and Services Tax) ITC (Input Tax Credit) declared in GSTR-9 can be set off against tax demand if missed in the monthly GSTR-3B. Justice Om Narayan Rai bench observed that the appellate authority did not justify why the IGST ITC declared in GSTR-9 could not be set off against the tax demand. In this case, the assessee/petitioner failed to claim Input Tax Credit (ITC) in respect of IGST pertaining to the months of May...

Post-Award Claim For Reimbursement Of Municipal Tax Is Not Maintainable U/S 9 Arbitration Act: Calcutta High Court

The Calcutta High Court held that a partner cannot claim reimbursement of municipal tax payments through a post award petition filed under section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Arbitration Act) as such issue constitutes substantive monetary dispute requiring adjudication under section 34 of the Arbitration Act. Justice Gaurang Kanth dismissed the petition filed by partners of M/s. Chander Niwas seeking directions for reimbursement from other partners of their share of...

Not Reasonable To Expect Taxpayer To Check Every Tab On GST Portal: Calcutta High Court Orders Appeal To Be Heard Despite Delay

The Calcutta High Court has held that where an adjudication order under the GST regime is uploaded on the GST Portal only under the “View Additional Notices and Orders” tab rather than the primary “View Notices and Orders” tab the resulting delay in filing appeal is to be condoned, considering that taxpayers cannot reasonably be expected to check multiple tabs for final orders. A Single Bench of Justice Om Narayan Rai, while hearing a writ petition filed under the WBGST/CGST Act,...

Invention Requiring Destruction Of Human Embryos Not Patentable: Calcutta High Court

The Calcutta High Court on Monday upheld the Patent Office's rejection of a patent application on the grounds that the invention involved the destruction of human embryos and was therefore unethical and contrary to public order and morality.A single bench of Justice Ravi Krishan Kapur, affirming the Patent Office's decision to reject the invention under Section 3(b) of the Patents Act, 1970, noted that Section 3(b) prohibits patents for inventions whose main use or commercial purpose is against...

Calcutta High Court Cancels “JAY'S” Trademark, Citing Similarity to PepsiCo's “LAY'S”

The Calcutta High Court has recently ordered the cancellation of the registered trademark “JAY'S”, finding it phonetically identical and deceptively similar to PepsiCo's well-known potato chips brand “LAY'S”. A single bench of Justice Ravi Krishan Kapur passed the order on November 10, 2025, while hearing PepsiCo's application under Sections 47 and 57 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, seeking the cancellation of the rival mark. The Court noted that Jagdamba Foods, the proprietor of “JAY'S”, was...

Once Resolution Plan Succeeds, Appeals Before CESTAT Abate, CENVAT Reversal Not Pre-Deposit: Calcutta High Court

The Calcutta High Court has upheld the disallowance of ₹165 crores of CENVAT credit on steel structures, parts, accessories, and cement as confirmed earlier by the Kolkata Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT).Justice Raja Basu Chowdhury, on the issue of abatement of the appeals, dismissed the grounds of challenge relating to (i) abatement of appeals before the CESTAT, and (ii) the Tribunal's jurisdiction to adjudicate the issue after the Corporate Insolvency...

Second Appeal Not Maintainable Under Trade Marks Act: Calcutta High Court Dismisses Dunlop's Appeal

The Calcutta High Court recently reaffirmed that a second appeal against a Single Judge's order is not permissible under the Trade Marks Act, 1999. The court clarified that once an appeal from an order passed by the Registrar of Trademarks is decided by a Single Judge, no further appeal can be filed before a Division Bench in view of the bar under Section 100A of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC).A Division Bench comprising Justice Arijit Banerjee and Justice Om Narayan Rai delivered the ruling on...

Civil Courts Cannot Grant Ex-Parte Injunction In Shareholder Disputes Due To Bar U/S 430 Companies Act: Calcutta High Court

The Calcutta High Court bench presided over by Justice Aniruddha Roy, has observed that a civil court cannot grant an ex parte ad interim injunction in a shareholder dispute, in light of the bar under section 430 of the Companies Act, 2013. The plaintiff filed a civil suit before the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Alipore, alleging that his shares in the Power Tools and Appliances Co. Pvt. Ltd. had been illegally reduced, usurping his control over the company. The court passed an...

Property Tax Is First Charge On Property; Auction Purchaser Liable To Pay It Before Sale: Calcutta High Court

The Calcutta High Court has held that property tax is a first charge on property and the auction purchaser is liable to pay property tax prior to sale. The bench stated that where a statutory first charge is created on the property, such as in respect of property tax under Section 232 of the Kolkata Municipal Corporation Act, 1980, the municipal authority is entitled to enforce such charge independently in accordance with the statutory mechanism provided therein. In such a situation,...