Guwahati Court August 1991 Judgments

Dr. (Miss) E. Sharma Vs. the State of Assam and ors.

Court: Guwahati

Srivastava, J. 1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, stated to be in public interest, seeks, seizure of all Books of accounts of the Assam State Branch of Red Cross Society, direction to Respondents No. 3 and 4 to open up for new membership, direction to Respondent No. 4 to call Annual General Meeting forthwith and to appoint committee to enquire into all acts of the Red Cross Society for last seven years and thereafter take appropriate action. The Respondent No. 3 is the Indian Red Cross Society Assam State Branch hereinafter referred as the 'Society', and the Respondent No. 4 is its Honorary Secretary. 2. The petitioner obtained M.B.B.S. degree in the year 1975 and started private practice at Guwahati. The petitioner attended M/s. Borthakur Nursing Home and in the year 1982 went to America for about a year. On return the petitioner again started private practice at Guwahati and was attached with M/s. East End Nursing Home. She later joined he Christian Me...

Commissioner of Wealth-tax Vs. Subimal Sen,

Court: Guwahati

S.N. Phukan, J.1. By this common judgment and order, we propose to dispose of all the three references as the questions of law involved are same. These references have been made under Section 27(3) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, on a direction issued by this court.2. Before we state the questions of law, it may be convenient to refer to the facts of all the three cases.3. In Wealth-tax References Nos. 20 and 21 of 1985, the references relate to the assessment years 1972-73 and 1973-74, and in Wealth-tax Reference No. 22 of 1985, the reference relates to the assessment year 1974-75.4. In Wealth-tax Reference No. 20 of 1985, the assessee was a partner of the firm, M/s. Tinsukia Pharmacy, Tinsukia. The firm had a fixed deposit of Rs. 74,405 and the assessee claimed that his share in the said deposit was Rs. 24,801. While determining' the value of interest in the firm, the assessee had deducted the above sum of Rs. 24,801 out of the value of interest in the firm calculated by him. The asse...

Commissioner of Wealth-tax Vs. Subimal Sen,

Court: Guwahati

Reported in: [1992]195ITR574(Gauhati)

S.N. Phukan, J.1. By this common judgment and order, we propose to dispose of all the three references as the questions of law involved are same. These references have been made under Section 27(3) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, on a direction issued by this court.2. Before we state the questions of law, it may be convenient to refer to the facts of all the three cases.3. In Wealth-tax References Nos. 20 and 21 of 1985, the references relate to the assessment years 1972-73 and 1973-74, and in Wealth-tax Reference No. 22 of 1985, the reference relates to the assessment year 1974-75.4. In Wealth-tax Reference No. 20 of 1985, the assessee was a partner of the firm, M/s. Tinsukia Pharmacy, Tinsukia. The firm had a fixed deposit of Rs. 74,405 and the assessee claimed that his share in the said deposit was Rs. 24,801. While determining' the value of interest in the firm, the assessee had deducted the above sum of Rs. 24,801 out of the value of interest in the firm calculated by him. The assess...

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Jhabarmal Agarwalla,

Court: Guwahati

S.N. Phukan, J. 1. On an application by the Revenue, the following question has been referred by the Tribunal for the opinion of this court: 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and on a proper construction of Section 4 of the Indian Partnership Act, 1932, section 2(23) and section 64(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the Tribunal was justified in dismissing the Departmental appeals impliedly holding the view that the share of profits from the firm arising to the wife/minor children of the assessee from the same firm in which the assessee is a partner was not includible in the individual assessment of the assessee under Section 64(1) as the individual was a partner in the firm representing his Hindu undivided family ?' 2. We may state here that though the framing of three questions referred to us in the three references, which we shall dispose of by this common judgment, are not in the same wording the law point involved is the same, that is the interpretation ...

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. 1. Jhabarmal AgarwallA. (i. T. R. No. 3 ...

Court: Guwahati

S. N. PHUKAN J. - On an application by the Revenue, the following question has been referred by the Tribunal for the opinion of this court :"Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and on a proper construction of section 4 of the Indian Partnership Act, 1932, section 2(23) and section 64(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the Tribunal was justified in dismissing the Departmental appeals impliedly holding the view that the share of profits from the firm arising to the wife/minor children of the assessee from the same firm in which the assessee is a partner was not includible in the individual assessment of the assessee under section 64(1) as the individual was a partner in the firm representing his Hindu undivided family ?"We may state here that though the framing of three questions referred to us in the three references, which we shall dispose of by this common judgment, are not in the same wording the law point involved is the same, that is the interpretati...

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. S.C. Biswas and Sons

Court: Guwahati

S.N. Phukan, J. 1. On the prayer of the Revenue, the following question has been referred under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the opinion of this court : ' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and having regard to the provisions of Section 187(2) of the Incorne-tax Act, 1961, the Tribunal was justified in confirming the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax holding that registration could be granted for a part of the accounting year, viz., up to April 4, 1979, when one of the partners of the firm died ?' 2. Briefly stated, the facts are as follows :The present reference relates to the assessment year 1979-80. The assessee was a partnership firm and the said firm was formed in the year 1965-66 by executing a deed of partnership on September 30, 1966, The firm was duly registered under the Income-tax Act. One of the partners died on April 4, 1979. Hence the present question. Though it is not relevant for the present referenc...

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Jhabarmal Agarwalla,

Court: Guwahati

S.N. Phukan, J. 1. On an application by the Revenue, the following question has been referred by the Tribunal for the opinion of this court:'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and on a proper construction of Section 4 of the Indian Partnership Act, 1932, section 2(23) and section 64(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the Tribunal was justified in dismissing the Departmental appeals impliedly holding the view that the share of profits from the firm arising to the wife/minor children of the assessee from the same firm in which the assessee is a partner was not includible in the individual assessment of the assessee under Section 64(1) as the individual was a partner in the firm representing his Hindu undivided family ?'2. We may state here that though the framing of three questions referred to us in the three references, which we shall dispose of by this common judgment, are not in the same wording the law point involved is the same, that is the interpretation of Se...

Gulabrai Hanumanbox Vs. Commissioner of Wealth-tax

Court: Guwahati

S.N. Phukan, J.1. On the prayer of the assessee, the following four questions have been referred to this court for opinion under Section 27(1) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, for short 'the Act'. The said questions are : ' 1. Whether the Tribunal having held that the provisions of Section 7(4) being procedural would apply to assessment year 1975-76 was justified in law in holding that, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the provision of Section 7(4) would not apply to the assessee's assessment for the assessment year 1975-76 ? 2. Whether the Tribunal was justified in law in upholding the finding of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner that the option under Section 7(4) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, has not been exercised by the assessee ? 3. Whether the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that it is not possible to infer that the same value of the property as determined in the case of the co-sharer, Keshoram Radheyshyam, for the assessment year 1975-76, vide order of assess...

Basantlal JaIn and Co. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax

Court: Guwahati

S.N. Phukan, J. 1. This reference is under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for short the 'Act', on the prayer of the assessee for the opinion of this court on the following question : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee is entitled to registration for the assessment year 1983-84 ?'2. It may be mentioned that the assessee wanted three questions to be referred to this court; however, the Tribunal referred only the above question. The present reference relates to the assessment year 1983-84.3. The assessee-firm was constituted with two partners, namely, Shri Basantlal Jain and Mrs. Chhagani Devi Jain. Shri Jivraj Jain, a minor was admitted to the benefits of partnership. The firm was granted registration up to the assessment year 1982-83. The firm was carrying on business under the name and style, M/s. Basantlal Jain and Co. The minor, Sri Jivraj Jain, attained majority and was admitted as a full-fledged partner to the newly constituted f...

Assistant Commissioner of Vs. Ampee Industries (P.) Ltd.

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Guwahati

Reported in: (1992)40ITD20(Gau.)

1. The appeal by the revenue is that the Id. CIT(A) should have followed the Circular No. 493 dated 21-8-1987 which is posterior to that relied on by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and that the Id. CIT(A) was not justified in annulling the assessment.2. The background and the facts of this case as noted in the assessment order were that the assessee was assessed in the status of a company and the method of accounting was shown as mercantile The previous year followed was 1987-88. The assessee had not yet started manufacturing or trading activity during the year, although the purpose and object was for manufacturing of biscuits. The Assessing Officer pointed out that the return along with the copies of profits and loss account etc., were filed on 10-1-1989 for the assessment year 1988-89, showing a loss of Rs. 18,280. The Assessing Officer scrutinized the accounts and completed the assessment under Section 143(3). He did not accept the money claimed by the assessee to have be...