Guwahati Court August 1982 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.
Banwarilal Chowkhani Vs. Commissioner of Wealth-tax
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Aug-09-1982
Pathak, Actg. C.J. 1. This reference under Section 27(1) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), at the instance of the assessee, had been referred to this court for decision on the following question; 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in holding that Section 18(4) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, was procedural in nature and so the previous approval of the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner of Wealth-tax was not necessary for levying penalty under Section 18(1)(a) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, for the assessment years 1960-61 to 1964-65 after its amendment by the Wealth-tax (Amendment) Act, 1964 ?' 2. This reference relates to assessment years 1960-61 to 1964-65. The following chart shows the details relating to the various assessment years :Assessment yearThe due date for filing the returnThe date on which the return was filedDelay in complete monthsThe date on which the penalty was leviedThe amount of penalt...
Sudhir Kumar Das and ors. Vs. Amitava Dhar
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Aug-04-1982
B.L. Hansaria, J.1. The question of Chairmanship of Karimgani Municipal Board has been before the Court ever since 1980. It is a pity that these grass-root democratic institutions should find themselves in several rounds of litigation. There can be no denial that the question of chairmanship of such institutions being in dispute, the energy of the commissioners is diverted from constructive works to fighting of legal battles. What happened in the present case was that some Commissioners served notice under Section 43 (2) of the Assam Municipal Act,' 1956 on the then chairman Sri Biseswar Das on 17-7-1980 requesting him to convene a special meeting of the Board to take up the matter of removal of Shri Das from the Chairmanship. A meeting came to be held thereafter on 6-8-1980, but it did not contain the aforesaid agenda. What happened in that meeting is a controversial issue between the parties. According to the plaintiff some members who were for removal walked out. The other version ...
Gopal Bagaria and ors. Vs. Swarga Narayan Mazumdar and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Aug-04-1982
B.L. Hansaria, J.1. A prosecution was launched under the provisions of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 hereinafter referred to as the Act, against opposite parties Nos. 3 to 9. Processes against those opposite parties were issued and they appeared. The learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate. Sibsagar then recorded the evidence of opposite party No. 1 the District Food Inspector on 7-9-1979. On the same day O. P. No. 9 filed a petition praying to implead petitioner No. 4 as an accused in the case, alleging, inter alia, that the adulterated mustard oil was manufactured by the said petitioner. The following order was passed on this prayer:Two accused persons are present. Others are not present. Advocate filed petition, 3 witnesses are present. The evidence of one witness is recorded. Accused Dulichand Deepchand filed petition for impleading the manufacturer M/s Gopal Oil Industries. Barpeta Road as an accused. Heard From the evidence of P. W. 1 it is seen that the said...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›