Guwahati Court June 1988 Judgments

Sita Rani Gupta Vs. State of Assam and ors.

Court: Guwahati

B.L. Hansaria, J.1. The demand for justice in the present case is by a victim of crisis. A poor widow within her early 20s has knocked the door of this Court through a public spirited lawyer to seek compensation, as far as money can, for the death of her driver-husband on 6-12-83 in a motor accident at Janimatihdonge Gaon under Sibsagar Police Station. The ignorance of the widow stood in her way to file a case either before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal or Commissioner appointed under the provisions of the Workmen's Compensation Act. Having come in contact with the aforesaid lawyer, she has approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution to seek just compensation for the death of her husband. The widow has two daughters also aged about 7 and 4 years by now to look after and to bring them up. Her poverty is, however, standing in the way. Shri Birmiwal has implored us to cast away the shackles of rigidity and to adopt a human and humane approach and to assist the poor w...

T.K. Baruah Vs. Commissioner of Wealth-tax

Court: Guwahati

A. Raghuvir, C.J.1. Tapan Kumar Baruah is the assessee in this case. The reference in this case is made under Sub-section (1) of Section 27 of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957. The following question is referred : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the calculation of penalty up to March 31, 1969 was to be made under Section 18(1)(i) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, as it originally stood from April 1, 1965, to March 31, 1969, as substituted with effect from April 1, 1965, by Section 18 of the Wealth-tax (Amendment) Act, 1964, and thereafter under Section 18(1)(i) as substituted by Section 24 of the Finance Act, 1969 ?'2. This case relates to five orders of penalty in relation to the assessment years 1964-65, 1965-66, 1966-67, 1967-68 and 1968-69. For all the five years all through, a consolidated order was passed by the Revenue authorities.3. All the five returns were filed by the assessee on August 31, 1969, but not on the due dat...

S. Charan Singh Vs. Commissioner of Wealth-tax

Court: Guwahati

A. Raghuvir, C.J. 1. S. Charan Singh is the assessee in this reference under Section 27(1) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957. The following are the two questions referred : '(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that although the show-cause notices under Section 18(2) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, were issued for non-compliance with the provisions of the notices under Section 14(2) of the Wealth-tax Act, penalty orders imposing penalties for the default under Section 14(1) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, for the assessment years 1966-67 and 1968 - 69 were valid and were not void ab initio ?(2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in upholding the order of penalty for the assessment years 1966-67, 1967-68 and 1968-69, on the finding that the calculation of penalty for the default up to March 31, 1969, was to be made under Section 18(l)(i) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, as substituted...

Potsangbam Ningol Thokchom Ongbi Ibecha Devi and anr. Vs. General Offi ...

Court: Guwahati

T.C. Das, J.1. These two writ appeals arise out of a judgment passed by the learned single Judge Mr. Justice K. N. Saikia (as he then was) in Civil Rule Nos. 128 and 129/81 (reported in 1982 Cri LJ 1675) (Gauh). The grievance of the appellants in both the appeals are that Shri Kangujam Loken Singh alias Premjit Singh, aged about 21 years of Kongman Makha and Th. Lokendra Singh, aged about 21 years of Pebia Pandit Leikai, Singjamei Makha along with Kangujam Iboyaima Singh were arrested on 23-9-80 by Army personnel of J. K. Rifle of Manipur, Imphal. Out of these three, Shri Kangujam Iboyaima Singh was admittedly released from army custody on 25-9-80 who came back to his house on 26-9-80 while the two others have not yet been returned home. The appellants in both the appeals who are the , mothers of both the boys claim that both of them were not released from the army custody and the plea taken by the respondents that they were released on 25-9-80 is a false plea to cover up the counter...

Kanesh Malakar Vs. Musstt. Protiva Rani Malakar

Court: Guwahati

Srivastava, J.1. The respondent had filed an application under Section 125 of the Cr. P.C., 1973 hereafter the 'Code', on the ground that on assurance by the petitioner that he would marry her, she had started living with him and came to be in a family way and then were married. A child was born but died soon afterwards. The petitioner illtreated her, drove her out of the house and had neglected to maintain her. The respondent accordingly claimed maintenance from the petitioner.2. The petitioner had resisted the claim and had denied that the respondent was ever married to him or that he was liable for her maintenance.3. The learned Magistrate by the impugned order dt. 14-12-81 directed the petitioner to pay Rs. 100/- per month as maintenance.4. Aggrieved, the petitioner has come in revision and Shri B. Banerjee, learned Counsel appearing on his behalf, has submitted that the opposite party-respondent was not the wife of the petitioner, and hence the impugned order is illegal. On the ...

Abdul Rab Abdul Salam Vs. Income-tax Officer.

Court: Guwahati

A. RAGHUVIR C.J. - These two writ petitions are filed by a partnership firm called Abdul Rab Abdul Salam. The firm was constituted on July 1, 1965, with four partners. Two among the partners are indicated in the firms name. The other two are Abdul Barik and Abdul Jabbar. The firm was reconstituted on April 1, 1969, and four more partners were inducted on that day. The main office of the firm is at Tinsukia in Assam and a branch at Sonari in Sibsagar District and another branch at Calcutta in the State of West Bengal. The firm deals in stationery, readymade goods and is the agent of Bata Shoe Company at all the three places of business. The issue raised in the two civil rules pertain to the income-tax assessment orders of the firm for the assessment years 1968-69 and 1969-70. The circumstances which prompted the firm to file the two civil rules are set out below and also as to what has preceded the impugned notices and as to why the Revenue has served the two notices on the firm.On Jun...

Goyal Trading Co. Vs. Income-tax Officer

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Guwahati

Reported in: (1989)28ITD265(Gau.)

Appellate order disposing of substantial issues on merits in four five lines is liable to be set aside.The Income Tax Officer made an addition of Rs. 2,90,289 under section 40A(3) and Rs. 2,77,688 under section 68, apart from the addition of Rs. 42,098. True, the Income Tax Officer might have dealt with the points at length and exhaustively but it is equally incumbent on the part of the first appellate authority to deal with the matter properly with more attention it deserved, particularly when substantial grounds have been raised in which various points of controversy are very much at large. Thus, since the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) is so short and cryptic, this part of the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) dealing with the merits of the case is set aside for fresh disposal by him.Appeal (CIT(A)--JURISDICTION OF COMMISSIONER (APPEALS)--Jurisdiction to entertain.Where income of assessee in the revised return exceeds Rs. 1 lakh, Commissioner (Appeals) has to entertain asses...

Ajit Singh Rais Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax.

Court: Guwahati

A. RAGHUVIR C.J. - The reference in this case was made under sub-section (1) of section 256 of the Income-tax Act, 1961.The three questions referred read as follows :"(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that despite the charge of interest under clause (iii) of the proviso to section 139(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, penalty can be validly imposed under section 271(1)(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?(2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that penalty can be levied under section 271(1)(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, in spite of the filing of the return within the time allowed under section 139(4) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?(3) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the delay by the assessee in filing the returns for the assessment years 1963-64 to 1967-68 was without any reasonable cause...

Tarun Chandra Barua Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax.

Court: Guwahati

A. RAGHUVIR C.J. - The following question is referred to this court under sub-section (2) of section 256 of the Income-tax Act. The question reads as under :"Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in holding that the land in question was a capital asset within the meaning of section 2(4A) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, and that there was capital gain subject to income-tax ?"In this reference, Tarun Chandra Barua is an assessee. He owned 175 bighas of land under Dag. No. 36 of village Fatasil Ambari area. The question in the instant case is relevant only to 25 bighas of land acquired under the Land Acquisition Act 1 of 1894. It appears that 5 bighas of land was acquired and the market value of the land was determined at Rs. 5,000 per bigha. Again 20 bighas of land was acquired for laying a road. The market value of the land was determined at Rs. 7,000 per bigha. In total, for the land acquired, the assessee received a sum of ...

B.V. Danny Mao Vs. State of Nagaland

Court: Guwahati

T.C. Das, J. 1. This appeal has been preferred by the convict B. V. Danny Mao. He stood trial of the charge under Section 302, I.P.C. in the Court of the learned Additional District Magistrate, Kohima, Nagaland. At the close of the trial and on scanning the evidence on record the learned Trial Court found the appellant guilty under Section 304, I.P.C. for causing the death of Nzanbemo Lotha and convicted him under the aforesaid provisions of law and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 5 years. The learned Trial Court found sufficient evidence to prove that Nzanbemo died from the knife stabbing injuries caused in a scuffle between Danny Mao and Nzanbemo. Against the aforesaid conviction and sentence this appeal has been preferred by the appellant Danny Mao.2. I have heard Mr. Charugopal Singh, learned Counsel for the appellant and Mr. D.K. Mishra, learned Public Prosecutor for the State of Nagaland at length. Before taking up for consideration the rival contentions of t...