Guwahati Court April 1989 Judgments

Doom Dooma Tea Co. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax

Court: Guwahati

A. Raghuvir, C.J. 1. This reference is made under Sub-section (1) of Section 256 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, at the instance of the assessee, a tea company with the name Doom Dooma Tea Company Ltd. The reference relates to the assessment year 1975-76. The tea estate paid Rs. 2,26,280 under the Companies (Profits) Surtax Act VII of 1964, and unsuccessfully claimed deduction before the revenue authorities. The Income-tax Officer rejected the claim as prohibited under Section 40(a)(ii) of the Income-tax Act. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner, on appeal, entertained a doubt as to the tenability of such a claim, and, therefore, confirmed the order under appeal. The Tribunal dismissed the further appeal following a decision of the Bombay Bench of the Appellate Tribunal in I.T.A. No. 3643 (Bom) of 1974-75 dated December 1, 1977. Finally, at the instance of the tea estate, the following question is referred to this court : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the...

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Pioneer Construction Co.

Court: Guwahati

B.L. Hansaria, J.1. The following two questions of law arising out of an order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal passed in connection with the assessment year 1974-75 have been referred to this court for decision under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter 'the Act') : '(i) Whether the Appellate Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax erred in law in entertaining and deciding an appeal relating to interest charged under Section 139(8) and whether the Tribunal also erred in confirming the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax in this regard ? (ii) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and having regard to the provisions contained in Explanation 2 to Section 139(8)(a), the Tribunal was justified in holding that there was no question of charging interest under Section 139(8) when the tax payable in the case of the Registered firm was nil ?' 2. We have heard Shri D. N. Choudhury, for the Department, and Shri A. K. Saraf, for th...

Hindustan General Insurance Society Ltd. Now National Insurance Co. Lt ...

Court: Guwahati

J.M. Srivastava, J.1. M/s. Hindustan General Insurance Society Ltd., the appellant hereafter the company, is aggrieved by the award dated 7.8.1976 made by the learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Meghalaya, Shillong, making the appellant liable for Rs. 20,000/- out of a compensation amount of Rs. 50,000/- awarded to respondent No. 1.2. The respondent No. 3, who was made liable for Rs. 30,000/-, has filed a cross-objection.3. Briefly, the facts are that deceased J.C. Mahanta, husband of respondent No. 1, who was Asstt. Agricultural Marketing Officer, on 7.12.1968 at about 5 p.m. while travelling from Rangram to Tura in truck registration No. AST 252, owned by Santosh Kumar Das had met with an accident and as a result sustained grievous injury and had died. The respondent No. 1 claimed compensation.4. The present proforma respondent No. 2 who was earlier the owner of the truck had transferred it to his son, the respondent No. 3.5. The appellant and proforma respondents had contested...

Md. Makbul HussaIn and anr. Vs. Must. Zubeda Khatoon and ors.

Court: Guwahati

B.P. Saraf, J. 1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree passed by the Assistant District Judge No. 2, Guwahati by which the judgment and decree passed by the Munsif No. 2. Guwahati was upheld and the appeal was dismissed. 2. The respondent No. 1, as plaintiff, filed a suit before the Munsif No, 2, Guwahati, praying for declaration of her right, title and interest in the suit land and house thereon left by her father Monia Sheikh and also for a preliminary decree for partition of the suit land and house thereon. The case of the respondent No. 1-plaintiff was that she was the youngest daughter of late Monia Sheikh who had a residential house at Athgaon, Guwahati, on a plot of land measuring 1 Katha 2 Lechas. It was claimed that she was one of the heirs of late Monia Sk. along with her two brothers and two sisters and, as such, she was entitled to a share in the said property. It was also her case that she used to reside in a part of the said house even after the death...

Md. Abdul Kadir Choudhury Vs. State of Assam and anr.

Court: Guwahati

B.P. Saraf, J.1. The petitioner in this case is aggrieved by issue of process by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Karimganj on the basis of an offence report submitted by the Divisional Forest Officer, Karimganj Division, Karimganj and has filed this petition for quashing of the same on the ground that the allegations made in the offence report do not disclose the ingredients of offences alleged.2. The petitioner is a partner of a firm M/s. Ameria & Co. (Saw Mill) situated at Fakirbazar, Karimganj. In course of its business, the said Firm procures timber for its saw mill by purchasing logs from the individual contractors as well as the Forest Department and also by taking lease of timber mahals. On 11-6-87, the Divisional Forest Officer, alongwith a number of other officers and a Magistrate visited the mill premises of the petitioner and noticed some discrepancies in the hammer marks on the timber logs covered by 3 transit passes. The logs were seized. Thereafter, a complaint was filed...

Bibijan Begum Vs. Income-tax Officer

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Guwahati

Reported in: (1990)32ITD157(Gau.)

1. The appeal is by the assessee which is preferred against the order of the C.I.T.(Appeals) by which various claims of the assessee were rejected.2. In the assessment order, the I.T.O. mentioned that the assessee showed in the return an income of Rs. 21,670 which included salary of Rs. 3,600 and l/5th share of rent from multi-storeyed R.C.C. building known as Babi Market at Ganeshguri, Charali, Gauhati. The assessment was made under Section 143(1). Later on, the case was taken on scrutiny and the assessment was re-opened under Section 143(2)(b). The assessee claimed that she had one-fifth share only from the rental income. The I.T.O. pointed out that the assessee was assessed for the first time for the assessment year 1982-83 where her share was shown at l/3rd in the same building. The assessment year involved now is 1985-86. The I.T.O. pointed out that for the assessment year 1982-83, it was pointed out that the assessee along with her two children, namely, Md. Bakhtiar Ali Ahmad an...

India Carbon Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax

Court: Guwahati

A. Raguvir, C.J. 1. The assessee in this case is India Carbon Ltd. at Gauhati and the questions in the reference relate to the assessment year 1976-77. The subject-matter in the questions pertains to whether bonus amounts set apart (called 'set-on' amount) whether can be deducted from the profit and loss account of the assessee. 2. The assessee claimed deduction of two amounts, Rs. 8,56,241 as bonus paid and Rs. 7,36,915, the amount deposited in the 'set-on' account. The former was claimed under Section 36(1)(ii) and the latter under Section 37 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The Income-tax Officer allowed the deduction of Rs. 8,56,241 but rejected the claim for Rs. 7,36,915. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner at Shillong ordered both to be deducted. The Tribunal held that the latter cannot be held to have been paid and following a decision in I. T. A. No. 5429(Cal) of 1975-76 dated May 11, 1978, overturned the decision of the appellate authority. 3. In the past, like claims made by ...