Judgment : High Court Division Full List
 
Case Type
Case/Tender Number
Year
Parties
Short Description
 

Case Number Parties Short Description
1
Md. Farid Miah vs National Board of Revenue and others.
On a plain reading of the above it appears that the authority concerned is empowered to lock BIN of the person concerned in order to recover any pending demand of VAT, supplementary duties, turn over tax, penalty or fine in the manner as prescribed therein.
The respondents, however, did not come forward with any affidavit in opposition with relevant documents controverting the assertion of the petitioner with regard to pending demand.
In view of the position of law and facts, we have no manner of doubt to find that locking the Business Identification Number (BIN) of the petitioner bearing No.003071036-0304 under Reference No.7/vat (226)/ dapucom /it/ binlock/2022/628 (Annexure-D) without any demand pending against him is unlawful for having been done in violation of Section 95 of the Value Added Tax and Supplementary Duty Act, 2012.
2
Thai Foils and Polymer Industries Limited vs Customs, Excise and VAT Appellate Tribunal, Dhaka and others.
It is an admitted position of fact that challenging the adjudicating order dated 05.09. 2022 passed under Nothi No.4 /Musak (686)Kar Fakhi/Thai Foils/Bichar/ Purbo-Comi:/2022/3322 by the Commissioner, Customs, Excise and VAT Commissionerate, Dhaka (East), Dhaka, the respondent No.2 the petitioner as appellant preferred an appeal before the Customs, Excise and VAT Appellate Tribunal, Dhaka, under Section 122 of the VAT and Supplementary Duty Act, 2012. However, in preferring the appeal before the Tribunal a delay of 428(Four hundred twenty eight ) days has occurred. The Tribunal concerned ultimately dismissed the appeal having not been convinced about the cause of delay so has occasioned while preferring the appeal.
The power to condone the delay by the Tribunal is discretionary. However, the assertion of the petitioner is that the appeal in question has been preferred in due compliance of law i.e., upon fulfillment of the requirement of payment over the demand in question and that for dismissal of the said appeal the petitioner has become non-suited.
3
Most Rokeya Begum and others Vs. Most. Parul Begum and others
Disposed of.
4
Md. Mokter Hossain, son of late Akbor Ali of villageShibrampur Pachimpara, Police Station-Shahzadpur, District- Sirajgonj.-Vs-Md. Pashan Ali and others
Discharged
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
Alhaj Abdur Rahim Vs. Alhaj Shafiq Uddin and others
Discharged.
16
Commissioner of Customs, Customs Bond Commissionarate, 342/1, Segunbagicha, Dhaka vs Customs, Excise and VAT Appellate Tribunal, Jiban Bima Bhaban (3rd floor), 10 Dilkusha Commercial Area, Dhaka and another
17
The Oriental Bank Limited (At present ICB Islamic Bank Limited) vs The Government of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh and others
18
19
20
21
22
23
মোছা নাজমা আক্তার বনাম কাছুম আলী এবং অন্যান্য গং
24
Khan Md. Akhtaruzzaman vs Artha Rin Adalat No. 1, Dhaka and others
25
Mst. Lili Alam Khanam VS Tasar Uddin being died his legal heirs: 1(Ka) Md. Shahabuddin and others.
-
26
F.Q. Khan
Discharged
27
Bangladesh Power Development Board represente by its Chairman WAPDA Building, 1st Floor, Motijheel Commercial Area, Dhaka-1000.-Vs-Sinha Power Generation Company Limited, Head Office, Mohakhali Tower, 13th Floor, 82, Mohakhali C/A, Dhaka-1212.
Discharged
28
Identification System for Enhancing Access to Services (IDEA) Project (2nd Phase), a Project of the Election Commission of Bangladesh, represented by the Chief Election Commissioner, …Petitioner(In W.P. No. 11868/2021) With Jamuna Star Save Guard Services Limited represented by its Managing Director Md. Salim Raza … Petitioner(In W.P No.11008/2021) -Versus- Central Procurement Technical Unit(CPTU), Implementation Monitoring and Evaluation Division, Ministry of Planning, Sher-E-Bangla Nagar, Dhaka, represented by the Director-General, ...Respondents (In W.P.No.11868/2021) Bangladesh Election Commission represented by the Chief Election Commissioner of Nirbachan Bhaban, Agargaon, Dhaka and others, ...Respondents (In W.P.No.11008/2021)
29
Khan Mohammad Ahsan -Versus- The Government of Bangladesh, represented by the Secretary, Ministry of Housing and Public Works, Bangladesh Secretariat, Ramna, Dhaka and others
30
Md. Mirajul Islam Vs. The State and another
31
Md. Abu Alam and another ...Petitioners. -Versus- 1(Ka) Farida Begum and others ....Opposite parties.
32
Monoranjan Ghosh and others ...Appellants. -Versus- Mohammad Jashim Uddin Khan and others
33
Nazim Uddin Miah and another … Appellants -VersusAmzed Hossain Miah …Respondent
34
Muhammad Abdul Aziz vs the state and another
35
ICB Islamic Bank Limited vs Commissioner (current charge), Customs, Excise and VAT Commissionerate, Dhaka (South), Dhaka and others
The petitioner has challenged the impugned final demand dated 16.08.2018 (Annexure-B) issued by the respondent concerned under Section 55(3) of VAT Act, 1991 mainly on the ground that part of the said demand is time barred from January, 2011 to December, 2012.
Vide Section 55(1) of VAT Act 1991 the authority concerned is empowered to make demand for the evaded or less paid VAT within 5(five) years. Since the impugned demand so made for the respective period from January, 2011 to December, 2012 is barred by limitation; hence, making final demand covering the said period is without jurisdiction.
36
Advocate Khan Himayat Uddin and another -Vs.- Government of Bangladesh, represented by the Secretary, Prime Minister’s Secretariat, Tejgaon, P.S.- Tejgaon, District: Dhaka
PIL matter
37
Mariam Mujahida -Vs,- The Government of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh, represented by the Secretary, Secondary and Higher Education Division, Ministry of Education, Bangladesh Secretariat, Dhaka and others
38
Mustak Ahmed and others -vs- Mosammat Juhora Hoque and others
39
40
Janata Bank, Janata Bhaban Corporate Branch 110 Motijheel C/A, Dhaka on behalf Deputy General Manager.-Vs-M/S Dynamic Textile Industries Limited. a. House No. 40/1, Road No. 91, Gulshan North Avenue, Police Station- Gulshan, Dhaka-1212. b. Registered Office, Motijheel C/A, P.S. Motijheel, Dhaka-1000 on behalf Managing Director and others.
Allowed
41
Bangladesh House Building Finance Corporation, Zonal Office, Rajshahi. ---Plaintiff-Appellant. -Versus- Most. Rowshan Ara Begum --- Defendant-Respondent.
42
Shuvash Chandra Ghosh and others. --- Plaintiffs-petitioners. -VersusDulal Chandra Ghosh and others --- Defendants-opposite parties.
43
Jasim Vs. The State
44
Abdullah Al Motin vs the state
45
Abdullah Al Motin vs the state
46
Abdullah Al Motin vs the state
47
Md. Hanif Vs. The State
48
49
Md. Saiful Islam Vs. The State
50
Md. Azizul Hoque Vs. The State and another