PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2, KOLKATA vs. M/S. CENTURY ENKA LIMITED

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

64 of 300 12. With the above reasoning, the learned single bench of this court refused to grant injunction against BCL as being the third party to the testamentary suit. It is submitted that the same principle would apply in the instant case and no interim order can be passed affecting BCL and other companies, trusts and societies

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-4, KOLKATA vs. M/S V2 RETAIL LTD.

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE BIVAS PATTANAYAK

64 of 300 12. With the above reasoning, the learned single bench of this court refused to grant injunction against BCL as being the third party to the testamentary suit. It is submitted that the same principle would apply in the instant case and no interim order can be passed affecting BCL and other companies, trusts and societies

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-4, KOLKATA vs. M/S. JAGANNATH BANWARILAL TEXOFABS PVT LTD

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE BIVAS PATTANAYAK

64 of 300 12. With the above reasoning, the learned single bench of this court refused to grant injunction against BCL as being the third party to the testamentary suit. It is submitted that the same principle would apply in the instant case and no interim order can be passed affecting BCL and other companies, trusts and societies

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-4, KOLKATA vs. M/S. J.J.EXPORTERS LTD.

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE BIVAS PATTANAYAK

64 of 300 12. With the above reasoning, the learned single bench of this court refused to grant injunction against BCL as being the third party to the testamentary suit. It is submitted that the same principle would apply in the instant case and no interim order can be passed affecting BCL and other companies, trusts and societies

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-5, KOLKATA vs. L D S CITY PROJECTS PVT LTD

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE BIVAS PATTANAYAK

64 of 300 12. With the above reasoning, the learned single bench of this court refused to grant injunction against BCL as being the third party to the testamentary suit. It is submitted that the same principle would apply in the instant case and no interim order can be passed affecting BCL and other companies, trusts and societies

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-4, KOLKATA vs. M/S. TCG LIFESCIENCES LTD.

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

64 of 300 12. With the above reasoning, the learned single bench of this court refused to grant injunction against BCL as being the third party to the testamentary suit. It is submitted that the same principle would apply in the instant case and no interim order can be passed affecting BCL and other companies, trusts and societies

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL-1), KOLKATA vs. M/S. RUNGTA MINES LTD

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

64 of 300 12. With the above reasoning, the learned single bench of this court refused to grant injunction against BCL as being the third party to the testamentary suit. It is submitted that the same principle would apply in the instant case and no interim order can be passed affecting BCL and other companies, trusts and societies

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2, KOLKATA vs. M/S THE CALCUTTA TRAMWAYS COMPANY (1978) LTD.

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

64 of 300 12. With the above reasoning, the learned single bench of this court refused to grant injunction against BCL as being the third party to the testamentary suit. It is submitted that the same principle would apply in the instant case and no interim order can be passed affecting BCL and other companies, trusts and societies

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, KOLKATA vs. M/S. HEIGHT INSURANCE SERVICES LTD

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

64 of 300 12. With the above reasoning, the learned single bench of this court refused to grant injunction against BCL as being the third party to the testamentary suit. It is submitted that the same principle would apply in the instant case and no interim order can be passed affecting BCL and other companies, trusts and societies

PRINCIPAL CIT-14, KOLKATA vs. SHRI VISHWANATH GUPTA

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

64 of 300 12. With the above reasoning, the learned single bench of this court refused to grant injunction against BCL as being the third party to the testamentary suit. It is submitted that the same principle would apply in the instant case and no interim order can be passed affecting BCL and other companies, trusts and societies

RAJESH JAJODIA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 45 KOLKATA AND ORS

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL, CHIEF JUSTICE (ACTING),HON'BLE JUSTICE RAJARSHI BHARADWAJ

64 of 300 12. With the above reasoning, the learned single bench of this court refused to grant injunction against BCL as being the third party to the testamentary suit. It is submitted that the same principle would apply in the instant case and no interim order can be passed affecting BCL and other companies, trusts and societies

M/S SINGHI AND CO vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX VIII

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL, CHIEF JUSTICE (ACTING),HON'BLE JUSTICE ANIRUDDHA ROY

64 of 300 12. With the above reasoning, the learned single bench of this court refused to grant injunction against BCL as being the third party to the testamentary suit. It is submitted that the same principle would apply in the instant case and no interim order can be passed affecting BCL and other companies, trusts and societies

TCG LIFE SCIENCES PVT LTD vs. JOINT COMM OF INCOME TAX RANGE59 KOL AND ANR

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL, CHIEF JUSTICE (ACTING),HON'BLE JUSTICE ANIRUDDHA ROY

64 of 300 12. With the above reasoning, the learned single bench of this court refused to grant injunction against BCL as being the third party to the testamentary suit. It is submitted that the same principle would apply in the instant case and no interim order can be passed affecting BCL and other companies, trusts and societies

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2, KOLKATA vs. M/S KESORAM INDUSTRIES LTD.

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL, CHIEF JUSTICE (ACTING),HON'BLE JUSTICE ANIRUDDHA ROY

64 of 300 12. With the above reasoning, the learned single bench of this court refused to grant injunction against BCL as being the third party to the testamentary suit. It is submitted that the same principle would apply in the instant case and no interim order can be passed affecting BCL and other companies, trusts and societies

SHWETA CHHAWCHHARIA vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA-12

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE I. P. MUKERJI,HON'BLE JUSTICE KAUSIK CHANDA

64 of 300 12. With the above reasoning, the learned single bench of this court refused to grant injunction against BCL as being the third party to the testamentary suit. It is submitted that the same principle would apply in the instant case and no interim order can be passed affecting BCL and other companies, trusts and societies

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL-2, KOLKATA vs. ELECTROCAST SALES INDIA LTD.

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE I. P. MUKERJI,HON'BLE JUSTICE KAUSIK CHANDA

64 of 300 12. With the above reasoning, the learned single bench of this court refused to grant injunction against BCL as being the third party to the testamentary suit. It is submitted that the same principle would apply in the instant case and no interim order can be passed affecting BCL and other companies, trusts and societies

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 5 KOLKATA vs. PREMIER TIE UP PVT LTD

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE SUPRATIM BHATTACHARYA

64. The observations of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Voestalpine Schienen GmbH (supra) must be noted. 26 “25. Section 12 has been amended with the objective to induce neutrality of arbitrators viz. their independence and impartiality. The amended provision is enacted to identify the “circumstances” which give rise to “justifiable doubts” about the independence or impartiality

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL -1, KOLKATA vs. SURAJ SAHANA

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

Section 263 could not have been exercised and such power could have been exercised only when the assessing officer failed to conduct an enquiry which is not the case of the assessee before this Court. With regard to under what circumstances the power under Section 263 could be invoked and the parameters to be fulfilled, reliance was placed