Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal / NCLT & Others
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
In Favour Of: New
---- In Favour Of ----
  • ---- In Favour Of ----
  • Assessee
  • In favour of Assessee
  • Partly in favour of Assessee
  • Revenue
  • In favour of Revenue
  • Partly in favour of Revenue
  • Appellant / Petitioner
  • In favour of Appellant
  • In favour of Petitioner
  • In favour of Respondent
  • Partly in favour of Appellant
  • Partly in favour of Petitioner
  • Others
  • Neutral (alternate remedy)
  • Neutral (Others)
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court.
Eg: Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Hyderabad

Use comma for multiple locations.

AY/FY: New?
Enter only the year or year range (e.g., 2025, 2025–26, or 2025–2026).
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:

---------------- For section wise search only -----------------


Statute Type: ?
This filter alone wont work. 1st select a law > statute > section from below filter
New
---- All Statutes----
  • ---- All Statutes ----
  • Select the law first, to see the statutes list
Sections: ?
Select a statute to see the list of sections here
New
---- All Sections ----
  • ---- All Sections ----
  • Select the statute first, to see the sections list

Accuracy Level ~ 90%



TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2026
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
TMI Citation
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        whatsappJoin Channel
        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :
        Companies Law

        1999 (1) TMI 421 - HC - Companies Law

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        Permission granted for Chanpatia factory operation with strict conditions to protect workers and cane-growers The Court granted permission for the Samiti to operate the Chanpatia factory for the 1998-99 season due to the significant benefits provided to workers ...
                          Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
                            Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.

                                Permission granted for Chanpatia factory operation with strict conditions to protect workers and cane-growers

                                The Court granted permission for the Samiti to operate the Chanpatia factory for the 1998-99 season due to the significant benefits provided to workers and cane-growers, despite incurring losses. Allegations of misappropriation were not substantiated by the official liquidator's report, leading to the imposition of strict conditions on the Samiti for continued operation, including financial transparency and compliance measures. The Court emphasized the importance of safeguarding the livelihoods of workers and cane-growers while ensuring accountability and proper management of the factory.




                                Issues Involved:
                                1. Permission for the Samiti to run the Chanpatia factory for the 1998-99 crushing season.
                                2. Allegations of misappropriation and defalcation of funds by the Samiti.
                                3. Inspection and report by the official liquidator.
                                4. Objections by the Sangharsh Samiti and other parties.
                                5. Conditions imposed on the Samiti for running the factory.

                                Detailed Analysis:

                                1. Permission for the Samiti to run the Chanpatia factory for the 1998-99 crushing season:
                                The Champaran Sugar Co. Ltd., in liquidation, had its Chanpatia factory run by the workers' cooperative society (Samiti) during the 1997-98 crushing season as an interim measure. The Samiti submitted an application (A-163) seeking permission to run the factory for the 1998-99 season. Despite not generating profits and incurring a loss of about Rs. 3 lakhs, the factory produced sugar worth about Rs. 3 crores and paid the workers and cane-growers substantially. The Court considered the interest of the workmen and cane-growers, whose livelihood depended on the factory, and decided to grant permission for one more season under specific conditions.

                                2. Allegations of misappropriation and defalcation of funds by the Samiti:
                                The objections raised by the Sangharsh Samiti and other parties alleged that the Samiti misutilized the opportunity by misappropriating and defalcating funds, selling scrap, ungraded sugar, molasses, and other items illegally. The official liquidator's report, however, did not substantiate these allegations. The Court noted that the security of the factories was not under the control of the official liquidator, making it difficult to pinpoint any theft or pilferage.

                                3. Inspection and report by the official liquidator:
                                The Court directed the official liquidator to inspect the two factories and submit a report to verify the allegations. The official liquidator's report, based on records and inspections, indicated that the factory ran for 65 days, purchasing 3,13,728.47 quintals of sugarcane and producing 25,249 quintals of sugar. The report showed substantial payments to cane-growers and workers, with a balance of Rs. 15 lakhs remaining unpaid to the staff. The Court accepted the report, finding no substantial proof of misappropriation or defalcation.

                                4. Objections by the Sangharsh Samiti and other parties:
                                The objections (A-166, A-170, A-171) primarily came from the Barachakia factory workers, who were not receiving payments as their factory required conversion to a sulphitation plant. The Court noted the potential internal disputes and politics among the workers as a factor in the objections. The objections did not dispute the running of the Chanpatia factory or the payments made to workers and cane-growers but focused on alleged malpractices by the Samiti.

                                5. Conditions imposed on the Samiti for running the factory:
                                The Court imposed several conditions on the Samiti for running the Chanpatia factory for the 1998-99 season:
                                1. An undertaking not to remove, sell, or transfer any machinery or assets without the official liquidator's permission.
                                2. Deposit proceeds from sales in a bank and use them for factory expenses.
                                3. Inform the official liquidator and obtain permission for hypothecating stocks.
                                4. Comply with free sale and levy requirements.
                                5. Appoint an internal auditor approved by the official liquidator.
                                6. Bear all payments and liabilities without imposing them on the company or official liquidator.
                                7. Obtain permission for selling scrap or ungraded items.
                                8. Not cut any trees without Court permission.
                                9. Maintain overall control of the factory with the Court and official liquidator.
                                10. Obtain a resolution from Samiti members agreeing to the conditions.
                                11. Report on steps taken for converting the Barachakia factory and generating funds.

                                The Court concluded that the Samiti should be given another opportunity to run the Chanpatia factory under these conditions, ensuring transparency and accountability while protecting the interests of the workmen and cane-growers.
                                Full Summary is available for active users!
                                Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.

                                Topics

                                ActsIncome Tax
                                No Records Found