Guwahati Court July 1979 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.
Abdul Mazid Vs. BurhanuddIn Ahmed and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jul-25-1979
Saikia, J. 1. This plaintiff's first appeal is from the judgment and decree dated 12-6-70 and 25-6-70 respectively, of the Assistant District Judge, Nowgong, in Title Suit No. 26 of 1967, partly decreeing the suit against respondent No. 1 and dismissing the suit against respondents Nos, 2 and 3. The facts of the case, in brief, are as follows: The suit land with structures thereon belonged to late Nasiben Nesa who died in Sept., 1964, leaving the defendant No. 1 her only son and heir. During her lifetime the defendant No. 1 leased out the suit property to the plaintiff on rent of Rs. 40/- per month from 23-6-59 till Aug., 1962. On expiry of the lease the plaintiff remained in possession without paying rent since July, 1963. After the death of Nasiben Nesa in Sept., 1964, on 30-12-64 the defendant No. 1 entered into an agreement in writing with the plaintiff to sell the suit property to the plaintiff for Rs. 9,000/-, received Rs. 5,000/- as advance, and agreed to execute the sale dee...
Jasman Rai Vs. Smt. Sonamaya Rai and anr.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jul-16-1979
A.M. Bhattacharjee, Ag. C.J.1. If this revisional application to be taken up for consideration in spite of its being filed seven days beyond the date on which it should have been filed, then the only question that would arise for consideration is that when a complaint is not made by a Court, or by a public servant acting or purporting to act in the discharge of his official duties, whether failure to examine the complainant after taking of cognizance and before issuing process would vitiate the trial. First, therefore, to the question as to the maintainability of this re-visional application in spite of the delay as aforesaid.2. Mr. Sharma, the learned Advocate for the Accused-Petitioner, has submitted that this revisional application must be held to be maintainable for two reasons. Firstly, he has urged that once this revisional application has been admitted and has now been fixed for hearing, it can no longer be thrown out on the ground of limitation and must be heard on merits. Se...
Smt. Indu Barua Vs. Commissioner of Wealth-tax, North Eastern Region
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jul-02-1979
N. Ibotombi Singh, J. 1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has, at theinstance of the assessee, referred under Section 27 of the W,T. Act, 1957 (hereinafter called ' the Act '), the following questions to this court: '(1) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that in the case of the assessee, the calculation of the penalty should be in accordance with Section 18(1)(i) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, as it stood up to March 31, 1965, and then as substituted with effect from April 1, 1965, by Section 18 of the Wealth-tax (Amendment) Act, 1964, and with effect from April 1, 1969, by Section 24 of the Finance Act, 1969, in the view that the default was a continuing one (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in upholding the order of penalty under Section 18(1)(a) passed by the Wealth-tax Officer (3) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and on the basis of the find...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Smt. Eva Raha
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jul-02-1979
Lahiri, J. 1. ' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was legally correct in refusing to rectify its orders dated May 30, 1974, in I.T.A. No. 709 (Gau) of 1972-73, and dated May 31, 1974, in I.T.A. No. 710 (Gau) of 1972-73, having regard to the provisions of Section 13 of the Direct Taxes (Amendment) Act, 1974, on the ground that it was a debatable point and so no rectification order can be passed under Section 254(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, relating to the assessment! years 1961-62 and 1962-63 '2. The above common question has been referred to the High Court under Section 254(4) of the I.T. Act, 1961, for short ' the Act ' by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Gauhati Bench at Gauhati.3. Relevant facts leading up to the reference may be summarised asfollows :4. For the assessment year 1961-62, the return of income of the assessee was due for submission on July 21, 1961. Similarly for the assessment year 1962-63, return of income was due for sub...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›