Guwahati Court September 1990 Judgments

Assam Frontier Tea Ltd. and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court: Guwahati

A. Raghuvir, C.J.1. The Assam Frontier Tea Ltd. is an incorporated company under the Companies Act, 1956. The company owns eight tea estates or tea gardens wherein 14,500 workers are employed for growing green tea leaves and for manufacturing black tea. The company expends Rs. 70 lakhs in welfare activities each year for running schools and hospitals in the estates. The company, in this regard, on March 28, 1984, deposited Rs. 2 crores with an association called Apeejay Educational Association Limited and another sum of Rs. 2 crores with Apeejay Medical Research and Welfare Association. The two amounts were deposited to be spent for the benefit of workmen and for other welfare activities in the eight estates.2. The company, in its income-tax return for the assessment year 1984-85, claimed deduction of Rs. 4 crores in its profit and loss account. The Income-tax Officer, on March 30, 1987, rejected the claim. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), on June 12, 1987, directed the Incom...

Purbanchal Road Service Vs. the State

Court: Guwahati

Manisana, J.1. In this application Under Section 482, Cr. P.C. read with S.401, Cr. P.C., the petitioner has challenged the order dated 8-8-90 passed by the Special Judge Assam and letters dated 8-5-90 of the Inspector (CBI) Gauhati in Crime Case No. RC 23/89 SHG Under Sections 120B and 409, IPC and Section 5(2), PC Act.2. Facts, -- The Inspector (CBI) Gauhati wrote letters dated 8-5-90 to the Manager of the State Bank of India Shillong, the Manager of the Indian Bank Gauhati, the Manager State Bank of India Aizawl and the Manager of the Gauhati Co-operative Town Bank Ltd. Gauhati directing them not to allow the petitioner, M/s Purbanchal Road Service Gauhati, to withdraw money or property from their respective banks respecting amount deposited by and credit balance and lockers held by the petitioner, which are described in those letters, stating that they have been seized Under Section 102, Cr. P.C. during investigation of the Crime Case No. 23/89 SHG. Thereafter, the petitioner file...

income-tax Officer Vs. R.K. Swamy

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Guwahati

Reported in: (1990)35ITD331(Gau.)

1. The appeals are by the revenue which are directed against the orders of the DCIT(A) by which he has deleted the income added in the assessment in respect of the capital gains on the sale of certain properties. The assessee, on the other hand, has filed cross objections to support the orders of the CIT(A) and also in order to attack the separate orders of the DCIT(A) on other points. Since the facts of the cases and the issues involved are identical and interlinked, we consolidate the appeals for disposal by this common order.2. The facts as noted by the authorities below are that the firm M/s.T. Khanderao & Sons, Shimoga, purchased a vacant plot of land on 24-11-1970. To avoid the provisions of Karnataka VacantLands in Urban Area (Prohibition of Alienation) Act, 1975, the partners of the firm effected a partition of the vacant land amongst themselves after obtaining permission from the Government in 1982. A registered deed dated 11-8-1982 was effected to convey the shares of th...

Second Gift-tax Officer Vs. N. Prasanna

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Guwahati

Reported in: (1990)35ITD597(Gau.)

1. The appeal is by the revenue against the decision of the CIT(A) who directed the GTO not to subject the value of the gift under the provisions of Section 4(1)(b) of the Gift-tax Act holding that the value of the property was exempt under Section 5(1)(xiv). It is also appeal by the revenue that the CIT(A) should have appreciated that the fair market value of the property was much more than the amount credited in the accounts of the assessee in the capital of the firm while forming the partnership. There are other issues also which have been taken up by the revenue in the present appeal.2. Briefly speaking, the GTO in the assessment order noted that the assessee filed a nil return of gift. He found that the assessee owned a site in Kumarapark East, Bangalore, which was valued at Rs. 4,50,000 by an approved valuer and the same was offered by the assessee in the wealth-tax return from the assessment year 1979-80 onwards. The assessment year for the gift-tax assessment which is presentl...