Skip to content

Guwahati Court July 1974 Judgments

Browse smarter

Open an 18-section brief on any judgment

Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.

  • AI Brief & Ask
  • Semantic AI Search
  • Devil's Bench

Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.

Jul 22 1974

In Re Sumitra Sherpani and ors.

Court: Guwahati

Decided on: Jul-22-1974

R.S. Bindra, J.1. This is an appeal by Sumitra Sherpani who has been found guilty of the charge under Section 201, I.P.C. and sentenced to 3 years R. I. and a fine of Rs. 500, or, in default, additional R. I. for 3 months.2. The first information report to this case was lodged at 5 P.M. on 27-7-1969 at the Police Station, Mekokchung, by Bande Bahadur Gurung, Ex. P-l being the copy thereof. This report was made on behalf of Gorkha Panchayat of Mokok-chung. It was mentioned therein that Sumitra Sherpani, a cousin of Dave Sherpa. had given birth to an illegitimate male baby on 19-7-1969, that Gorkha Panchayat was held on,27-7-1 69 to determine the circumstances relating to the birth of such a child, that Sumitra Sherpani was summoned before the Panchayat where she affirmed that her newly born baby was given bath by Suryaman Pra-dhan, her paramour, on the night of 21-7-1969. that during the course of that bath some quantity of soap water was forcibly poured by Suryaman Pradhan into the mo...


Jul 09 1974

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Smt. Ratna Kanti Bhuyan

Court: Guwahati

Decided on: Jul-09-1974

Sen, J. 1. This is a reference under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, at the instance of the Commissioner of Income-tax, in which the following question of law, arising from the order of the Tribunal, has been referred to this court for its opinion : ' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct and justified in holding that the penalty order of the Income-tax Officer was illegal '2. We have been taken through the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal and also the order under Section 271(1)(a) dated September 14, 1967, passed by the Income-tax Officer, Jorhat. The Tribunal in para. 15 of its order has found that the Income-tax Officer had passed his aforesaid order imposing penalty without indicating the period of delay and the basis for the calculation of penalty, and that the Income-tax Officer did not judicially exercise his power for imposition of penalty.3. From the assessment order and the notice of demand in this case, it...


  • ‹ Prev
  • Next ›

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial