Tax Management India. Com
                        Law and Practice: A Digital eBook ...

Category of Documents

TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Case Laws Acts Notifications Circulars Classification Forms Manuals SMS News Articles
Highlights
D. Forum
What's New

Share:      

        Home        
 

TMI Blog

Home List
← Previous Next →

2018 (10) TMI 713

e inasmuch as the said company after paying detention charges for a particular period has avoided payment by attempting to shift the liability on the consignee and M/s. M.A. Badani with whom the petitioner had no dealings. The said company has only initiated criminal proceedings against the consignee and M/s. M.A. Badani but, it has not initiated any civil proceedings to recover any money from them though it urges in its letters that the detention charges are payable to the petitioner thereby demanding money from the consignee. - The defence of the company with regard to the payment of detention charges for the subsequent period is, therefore, linked with its volition to return the containers to be accepted unconditionally. The petitioner could have accepted the return of the containers had there been no condition appended to it and could still maintain its claim for the balance sum. The petitioner could not do so for the stand taken by the said company. The company has also sought to make out a case that the containers having not taken back the same are occupying space for which the said company is entitled to damages. This contention of the company though does not sound good .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

ement between the said company and the petitioner the said company became liable to make payment of the hire charges/detention charges in respect of the aforesaid two containers from the date of realise from the Kolkata Port till the date the said two containers were returned to the petitioner. The petitioner also says that the agreed rate of hire charges/detention charges was US$ 75 per day per container converted at the then prevailing exchange rate being ₹ 68 per dollar. The petitioner states that for the period between 13th October, 2015 till 7th November, 2015 the petitioner has raised three bills and another bill dated 12th October, 2015 towards miscellaneous charges. The aggregate of the said four bills come to ₹ 2,99,300/-. Records reveal that the said company has paid a sum of ₹ 2,94,000/- after deducting a sum of ₹ 5300/- from ₹ 2,99,300/- as TDS. The petitioner though claims that there is an unpaid sum of ₹ 5300/- but the same having been deducted towards TDS and that the certificate thereto being annexed to the company s affidavit-in-opposition it should be and accordingly held that the entire amount against such four bills have been .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

on charges. The company also says that though it had no obligation to pay yet for a healthy business relationship they have taken all measures for recovery of the detention charges claimed by the petitioner from Aman International and/or M/s. M.A. Badani. They had also initiated criminal proceedings against both the consignee as well as M/s. M.A. Badani. 5) It appears that the company thereafter has issued two further letters through their advocate one on 28th January, 2016 and the other on 17th March, 2016. Both the letters were addressed to the consignee Aman International at Birgunj, Nepal. It appears from the said letters that the said company says that detention charges could not be paid to the petitioner as neither the consignee not the M/s. M.A. Badani paid the same. The containers also could not be returned as the petitioner was not willing to waive the detention charges as a consequence thereof the detention charges soared up. The said company in its letter dated 28th January, 2016 has claimed a sum of ₹ 13,47,756.60/- from the consignee and a sum of ₹ 20,75,496.60/- by the letter dated 17th March, 2016. 6) It also appears from the correspondences exchanged bet .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

November, 2015, that is, 21 days. The INR equivalent will be calculated by multiplying 1575 US$ by the exchange rate of US$ to INR prevailing on the date of delivery of this judgment. The said sum will bear interest at the rate of 10 per cent per annum from 8th June, 2016 being the date of issuance of the statutory notice until realisation. The petitioner on the basis of the official US$ exchange rate INR is to prevailing on date of delivery of this judgment should forward a bill within a period of 21 days from the date of delivery of this judgment and the said company shall pay the said sum by 25th of November, 2018. 10) On perusing the pleadings and materials on record it appears that the conduct of the company is not bona fide inasmuch as the said company after paying detention charges for a particular period has avoided payment by attempting to shift the liability on the consignee and M/s. M.A. Badani with whom the petitioner had no dealings. The said company has only initiated criminal proceedings against the consignee and M/s. M.A. Badani but, it has not initiated any civil proceedings to recover any money from them though it urges in its letters that the detention charges ar .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

onversion rate prevailing on date of the judgment within the period of 21 days of delivery of this judgment to enable the said company to deposit the money with the Registrar Original Side of this Court within a period of 25th November, 2018. The security may be in the form of a bank guarantee and if such bank guarantee is given by the said company the same shall be kept renewed from time to time until the disposal of the suit that may be filed by the petitioner by 28th November, 2018. 11) In the event the company pays the amount for which the winding up petition is admitted and secures the sum as aforesaid the company petition will remain permanently stayed. However, in the case of default by the company either to pay the amount for which the winding up petition is admitted or the amount the company is directed to secure, the petitioner will be at liberty to advertise the winding up petition once in Bartaman (A Bengali Daily) and once in Telegraph (An English Daily) both having wide circulation in Kolkata indicating therein that the winding up petition should appear before the Judge having determined on a working Friday immediately after expiry of three weeks from the date of publ .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

 

 

← Previous Next →

 

 

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || Database || Members || Refer Us ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.
|| Blog || Site Map - Recent || Site Map ||