Guwahati Court May 1991 Judgments

Commissioner of Wealth-tax Vs. Harendra Prasad Singh and anr.

Court: Guwahati

S.N. Phukan, J. 1. This is a reference from the learned Tribunal under Section 27(1) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957. The reference was made on a petition by the Revenue. The following question has been referred : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the assessee was entitled to the deduction under Section 5(1)(iv) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, in respect of his share in the house property belonging to the firm of which the assessee is a partner ' 2. Briefly, the facts are as follows : The reference relates to the assessment years 1978-79 to 1980-81. The assessees were partners of the firm, Messrs. Surendra and Brother, Makum. The assessees claimed deduction under Section 5(1)(iv) of the Wealth-tax Act in respect of their shares in the house property standing in the name of the firm in which they were partners, The Wealth-tax Officer rejected the claim on the ground that the assessees cannot claim any ownership of the house...

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. United Brothers

Court: Guwahati

S.N. Phukan, J. 1. On an application by the Revenue, the following question has been referred by the Tribunal to this court under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for short 'the Act'. 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the ease, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the lower authorities were wrong in cancelling the registration of the assessee-firm under Section 186 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?' 2. Briefly stated, the facts are as follows : Three persons formed a partnership which was duly registered under Section 184 of the Act. Subsequently, the audit by the Accountant-General objected to the grant of registration on the ground that an artificial juridical person, Ganeshji Maharaj, had been made a partner. Thereupon, the Income-tax Officer with the approval of the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner cancelled the registration. This order was affirmed by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. However, on appeal by the assessee, the order was set aside b...

Jalannagar Tea Estate (P.) Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Guwahati

Reported in: (1991)38ITD281(Gau.)

2. The Assessing Officer in his order of assessment mentioned that the assessee contributed to the Society for Integral Development as permissible under Section 35CC A for Rs. 5,00,000 which was not allowed by the Assessing Officer on the basis that the approval accorded to the said Society was withdrawn retrospectively from 31-12-1982. The assessment year involved is 1985-86 and the assessee's accounting year ended on 30-6-1984. The assessment order was made on 30-3-1988. He also mentioned in the order that the State Level Committee as prescribed under Section 35CC A found that the Society has violated the conditions for not maintaining proper books of accounts, for not utilising money for approved programme for rural development and merely acting as an agency for supplying certificates under Section 35CCA(2) on commission and returning the balance to the alleged donors within a day or two of the clearing of the cheque received as donation. He also observed that by claiming such paym...

Coal India Limited Vs. Khirod Chandra Chakraborty and anr.

Court: Guwahati

B.P. Saraf, J. 1. The only question that falls for determination in this appeal is whether the suit land falls within the definition of 'mine' as defined in Section 2(h) of the Coal Mines (Nationalisation) Act, 1973, or not. 2. The appellant, Coal India Limited is a Government Company. By virtue of the provisions of Section 3(1) of the Coal Mines (Nationalisation) Act, 1973 (hereinafter 'the Act') and order issued by the Central Government in exercise of powers under Section 5(1) thereto, the right, title and interest of a limited company, namely, the Assam Railways and Trading Company Limited (ARTC), Margherita in respect of the coal mine specified in the schedule to the said Act got vested in the appellant company with effect from 1-5-1973. 3. In the year 1979 the appellant company filed a suit against one Khirod Chandra Chakraborty, the principal respondent herein, for his eviction from the suit land and for recovery of khas possession. The case of the appellant-plaintiff, in brie...

Asher Ali Vs. Sukhna Seikh (deceased by LR's) and Ors.

Court: Guwahati

B.P. Saraf, J. 1. The question of law for determination in this appeal is whether a person claiming a portion of the compensation awarded by the Collector in land acquisition proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act of 1894, hereinafter referred to as 'the Act', is entitled to file a civil suit to establish his claim. 2. The facts of the case as far as material for determination of this question are as follows. A plot of land measuring 3 kathas was acquired by the Government for construction of National Highway. The plot belonged to late Sanaton Seikh who died leaving two sons, namely, Gangar Seikh and Panimal Seikh Gangar Seikh and Panimal Seikh also died. The successors of each one of them had 50% interest in the said land. The acquisition compensation was determined by the Collector at Rs. 10,143/-. The whole of the amount of compensation was paid by the Collector to defendants 4 and 5 who were the successors of one of the sons of late Sanaton Seikh on 22-7-67 on furnishing of...

Bogamal GohaIn and ors. Vs. Lakhinath Kalita and ors.

Court: Guwahati

B.P. Saraf, J. 1. The appellants 1 and 2 herein were defendants in a suit filed by the respondent No. 1 as plaintiff in the Court of the Munsiff, North Lakhimpur. That suit was numbered as Title Suit No. 13 of 1979. The relief claimed in that suit was permanent injunction against the defendants. The suit was decreed which was affirmed in appeal. The decree was also executed. 2. Despite the decree of permanent injunction, the appellants (the defendants in that suit) dispossessed the plaintiff from the suit land. The plaintiff filed an application under Order 39 Rule 2-A, C.P.C. as well as a suit for declaration of right, title and interest and recovery of possession and compensation against the defendants. The suit was numbered as Title Suit No. 55 of 1979 in the Court of Munsiff, North Lakhimpur. It was contested by the defendants on a number of grounds including res judicata. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, as many as 7 issues were framed. A number of witnesses were e...

Rupajuli Tea Co. (India) Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Guwahati

Reported in: (1991)38ITD270(Gau.)

1. The appeal is by the assessee which is directed against the order of the learned CIT (Appeals) by which he has sustained the loss of Rs. 3,50,562 which was considered as a speculation loss. It is also argued that the appeal by the assessee that the CIT (Appeals) erred in holding the disallowance for Rs. 1,60,000 (correct figure is Rs. 1,63,210) resulting from the sale of 2000 shares of Standard Batteries stated to be represented stock-in-trade. It is also another ground of appeal by the assessee in respect of the disallowance of loss of Rs. 1,05,230 (correct figure is stated to be Rs. 1,02,020) arising from the valuation of closing stock of shares.2. The next point of appeal is regarding disallowance of interest of Rs. 68,923 paid for loan of Rs. 9,19,040 taking for the purchase of a portion of the shares dealt in during the year and that the CIT(Appeals) erred also in sustaining the disallowance of Rs. 16,409 representing cost of stamps, miscellaneous expenses and proportionate ex...

Smt. Takhellambam Ongbi Mombi Devi Vs. the State of Manipur and ors.

Court: Guwahati

B.P. Saraf, J.1. (1) One Sorokhai-bam Ibohal Singh was detained under Section 3(1) of the Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1988 (hereinafter 'the Act') under the order of the Secretary (Home) to the Government of Manipur passed on 18-6-1990. His detention has been challenged by his mother-in-law Smt. Takhollambam Ongbi Mombi Devi by filing this habeas corpus petition on the ground, inter, alia, that the detention is vitiated due to the failure of the detaining authority to furnish the grounds of detention and relevant documents to the detenu in the language known to him.2. The case of the petitioner is that the detenu is a Manipuri and he can only read and write Manipuri language. He is not familiar with English. Two days after his detention, on 20-6-1990, he was furnished with the grounds of detention and the relevant documents running into 33 pages. All those were in English. As the petitioner did not know English, he was unable to und...

Smt. Laiphrakpam Ongbi Geeta Devi Vs. the State of Manipur and ors.

Court: Guwahati

B.P. Saraf, J.1. The fwrit petitioner is the wife of one Laiphrakpam Ibotombi Singh who was detained under Section 3 of the Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1988 (hereinafter 'the Act') on 19-6-1990 under orders of the Secretary (Home), Government of Manipur. He is still under detention. By this writ petition the validity of the aforesaid detention order is challenged.2. Heard Mr. N. Kumarjit Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner. Though the detention order has been challenged on various grounds, the main thrust of the challenge is on the ground of unreasonable long delay in disposal of the representation filed by the detenu. The time taken in disposal of the representation, according to the learned counsel, is 71 days. It is submitted that such a long delay is most unreasonable and cannot be justified on any count. The continued detention under the circumstances, it is contended, is illegal.3. Mr. L. Shyamkishor Singh, learned couns...

Zoii Nath Sarmah and anr. Vs. State of Assam and ors.

Court: Guwahati

Manisana, J.1. In this application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the petitioners have challenged the circulars dated 19-2-1991 and 26-3-91 issued by the Inspector General of Prisons Assam.2. The facts of the case may briefly be stated. The petitioner-1 Shri Zoii Nath Sarmah is an Advocate of this Court and is one of the political leaders in Assam. He was also a Minister. He along with the petitioner-2 Shri Imran Shah, who is also a politician, went to the District Jail at Mangaldoi on 19-3-91 to meet his clients who were under-trial prisoners. The petitioner-1 Shri Zoii Nath Sarmah made an application on 19-3-91 to the Superintendent of District Jail Mangaldoi for allowing him in his capacity as an advocate to interview his clients named in his application. But the Superintendent refused him permission in view of a circular issued by the Inspector General of Prisons Assam on 19-2-91. The circular runs as follows:It has been reported to me that groups of Politicians ha...