calcutta high court

RPFC Vs. The Hooghly Mills Co. Ltd. & Ors.(SC) - .The question which falls for consideration before this Court in this case is whether the employer of an establishment which is an ‘exempted establishment’ under the Employees’ Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (hereinafter, ‘the Act’ ) is subject to the provisions of Section 14B of the said Act whereby in cases of default in the payment of contribution to the provident fund, proceedings fo.. Full Article

Sixty-three years after Independence, Calcutta High Court, or at least its Public Information Officer (PIO), apparently feels that it is not under the control of the President of India or the government of India, since it has been set up under Letter Full Article

The Union ministry of corporate affairs is likely to approach the Supreme Court for permission to appoint a new central administrative head for offices of the registrar of companies (RoC) spread across the country. The move comes against the backdrop Full Article

Before 2008-09, deduction towards leave encashment and gratuity was a controversial issue following a Calcutta High Court judgment in the case of Exide Industries. The court ruled in favour of Exide and against the revenue department, saying that such provisions whether paid or not were eligible for deductions on the basis of actuarial valuation. A stay was announced in 2008 for 2008-09 returns assessed in the current financial year. Full Article

“If an appointment is made illegally or irregularly, the same cannot be the basis of further appointment. An erroneous decision cannot be permitted to perpetuate further error to the detriment of the general welfare of the public or a considerable section of the public,” the SC observed while allowing the appeal, Union of India vs Kartick Chandra Mondal. In this case, some persons who were casual employees working in a government department between 1981 and 1983 were.. Full Article

It depends on the facts of each transactions, whether the letting out of the property is incidental and subservient dominant object of selling the property or not. If the property has merely been let out b> the assessee then the same cannot be held to be exploitation of the property for commercial purpose in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Shambhu Investment (supra). We. therefore, restore this issue to the file of the AC) for fresh consideration in the light of afor.. Full Article

The assessee claimed deduction u/s 80-IB (10) which was rejected by the AO but allowed by the CIT (A). On appeal by the department, the Tribunal ruled against the assessee and held that it was not eligible for deduction. The assessee filed a MA u/s 254 (2) pointing out that it had cited a judgement of the Kolkota Bench of the Tribunal (which had been considered by the CIT (A)) and a judgement of the Kolkota High Court which had not been considered by the Tribunal when de.. Full Article

CIT vs. Exide Industries (Supreme Court) S. 43B (f) was inserted by the Finance Act, 2001 w.e.f. 1.4.2002 to provide that any sum payable by the assessee as an employer in lieu of any leave at the credit of his employee shall be allowed as a deduction only in the year of actual payment. The [...] Full Article