Guwahati Court March 1993 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Sarda Trading Corporation
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Mar-30-1993
Manisana, J. 1. At the instance of the Commissioner of Income-tax, the following question of law has been referred to this court under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act', for short) : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that for computation of income under the head 'Capital gains' deduction under Section 80T of the Income-tax Act, 1961, is to be given before giving deduction under Section 54E of theAct ?' The assessee is a registered firm. The assessment year involved is 1979-80. During the previous year, the assessee sold a flat at Bombay. The assessing authority ('the ITO'), after deducting the written down value and sale expenses from the net consideration, decided under Section 54E of the Act as to what extent capital gain on the transfer of the capital asset shall not be chargeable to income-tax in respect of the sum of Rs. 75,000 which formed part of sale proceeds and deposited with the United Comm...
Kailash Singh Vs. Hiralal Dey
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Mar-30-1993
S.N. Phukan, J. 1. This revision petition under S, 115 read with Section 151, CPC is by the tenant against the judgment and decree dated 9-12-86 of the first appellate court viz. Asstt. District Judge, Tezpur in Title Appeal No. 14 of 1983 dismissing the appeal by the present petitioner and up-holding the decree for ejetment passed by the learned Munsiff No. 2 tezpur in Title Suit No. 9 of 1980. 2. There is no dispute that the present petitioner-defendant was a monthly tenant in respect of the suit premises at a monthly rent of Rs. 50/- plus Rs. 5/- per month as electric charge and the tenancy was according to English Calendar month. Plaintiff has alleged that the monthly rent of Rs. 55/- was payable on the 1st day of each following month according to English Calendar month. Plaintiff started a shop in the suit premises. According to plaintiff after April, 1979, the defendant did not pay any rent and became a defaulter. It' has also been pleaded that the suit room is required by the...
Md. Sibar UddIn and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Mar-29-1993
S.N. Phukan, J. 1. The present petition under Section 115 read with Section 151, C.P.C. is directed against the order dated 22-12-1988 passed by the learned Asstt. District Judge, Barpeta in Misc. Appeal No. 14/88. By the said order, the learned lower appellate court affirmed the order of the learned Munsiff No. 1, Barpeta passed in Title Suit No. 53/ 88. 2. The suit was laid by 4 plaintiffs praying for a decree for declaration that they are citizens of India and also for a permanent injunction restraining the defendants from deporting them from India. In the plaint it has been urged that plaintiff No. 1 came to Assam from erstwhile East Pakistan with his father before 1940 and settled in village Uttar Mainabari, Police Station Bagbor, District Barpeta, Plaintiffs Nos. 2, 3 and 4 are sons and daughters of plaintiff No. 1. They were arrested for deporting on 11-2-1979 but somehow they could not be sent back to Bangladesh and thereafter they returned and filed the present suit. By ord...
Sanjoy Mitra Vs. Bhupendra Nath Bhattacharjee
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Mar-29-1993
S.N. Phukan, J. 1. This petition u/Section 115 read with Section 151, C.P.C. is directed against the judgment and order dated 22-1-92 passed by the learned Addl. District Judge, Kamrup at Gauhati in Tital Appeal No. 1/90. By this impugned judgment and order, the learned lower appellate court set aside the decree passed by the learned Asstt. District Judge No. 2, Gauhati in Title Suit No. 13/84 and remanded the case for trial after framing necessary issues. 2. Briefly stated the facts are as follows :-- The plaintiffs who are the present petitioners laid the Title Suit No. 13/94 against the opp. parties for their ejectment on various grounds including the construction of the house as it is in dilapidated condition, bona fide requirement, default and nuisance was also pleaded. It is not necessary to state fully the grounds for which the decree for ejectment was prayed. The suit was contested by defendant-opp. parties denying the allegations of defaulter, bona fide requirement, unautho...
Sri Kajal Sarkar and anr. Vs. State of Assam and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Mar-27-1993
1. This appeal is against the judgment and order dated 3-12-92 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Tinsukia in Sessions Case No. 86(T)/ 88. By the impugned judgment, the learned Sessions Judge found both the accused-appellants Naru Malakar and Kajal Sarkar guilty under Section 302/34, I.P.C. and convicted them accordingly and sentenced them to rigorous imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 1,000/- each. Both of them were also found guilty under Section 393, I.P.C. and sentence of 3 years rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs. 1,000/- each were imposed. The learned Sessions Judge also found them guilty under Section 394, I.P.C. and accordingly convicted them and sentenced them to 10 years rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs. 5,000/-. The sentences were to run concurrently.2. On 6-1-84 Hemraj Agarwalla (P.W. 4) lodged the FIR before the Officer-in-charge, Tinsukia Police Station informing that on that day at about 9 p.m. on hearing Halla near the house of his brother deceased Muralidh...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Namdang Tea Co. India Ltd.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Mar-26-1993
U.L. Bhat, C.J. 1. The following question has been referred at the instance of the Revenue by the Appellate Tribunal under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 : ' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in deleting the interest charged under Section 216 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?' 2. We have heard both sides. 3. The assessee, a limited company, derives income from the manufacture and sale of tea. The dispute relates to the assessment year 1977-78. A notice under Section 210 of the Act was issued by the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax for payment of tax of Rs. 19,83,819. The assessee filed an estimate on June 1, 1976, showing a tax liability of Rs. 12,10,000. He filed a final estimate on March 14, 1977, showing the tax payable af Rs. 18,41,070. The Inspecting Assistant Commissioner completed the assessment determining the tax liability at Rs. 21,64,701 and surcharge of Rs. 1,08,235. The arrears amounted to Rs. 1...
Girish Saikia Vs. State of Assam
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Mar-24-1993
S.B. Roy, J.1. By this appeal the appellant Shri Girish Saikia seeks to challenge the judgement dated 5-5-88 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Sonitpur, Tezpur in Sessions Case No. 147(S)/85 convicting the appellant under Section 304, Part II, I.P.C. and sentencing him thereunder to suffer R.I. for 10 years.2. The prosecution case, in short, is that on 14-5-82 one Shri Lila Kanta Bora (P.W. 1) lodged a complaint at Chatia Police Station alleging, inter alia, that on 14-5-82 one Shri Gayan Bora and Shri Jiten Bora came and reported him that the appellant had assaulted his father (since deceased) and inflicted some injury. On receipt of the said information, P.W. 1 and 10/12 other villagers, including the persons mentioned therein, went to the house of the appellant and upon reaching there found that the deceased was lying on a bed and bleeding from his head. It was further stated in the said complaint that they found injury on the head of the deceased. Within about 10 minutes of th...
Arunachal Forests Products Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Mar-23-1993
U.L. Bhat, C.J.1. The dispute projected in these writ petitions relates to the correct classification and entry relating to Block Board manufactured by the petitioners. According to the petitioners, Block Board manufactured by them falls under entry 4410.90 in Chapter 44 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 (for short, the 1985 Act), while according to the Department the same falls under entry 4408.90.2. Civil Rule Nos. 1500/89, 1666/89, 1668/89, 246/90, 1594/90 and 362/90 relate to the period prior to 19-3-1990 while other writ petitions relate to the period falling within the period beginning from 20-3-1990 to 28-2-1992.3. Levy of excise duty prior to 28-2-1986 was governed by the provisions of 1st Schedule to Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 (for short, the 1944 Act). Relevant portion of Item 16(B) of the 1st Schedule read as follows :-'WOOD and articles of wood, the following namely :Plywood, Block Board (including flush doors), Thirty per cent Lamin Board, Batten Board, hard ...
Geeta Sangma Vs. State of Nagaland and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Mar-19-1993
H.K. Sema, J.1. This petition relates to custody death. In this writ petition, the petitioner claimed an award of compensation of Rs. 3,00,000/- for causing the death of the petitioner's husband, late Francis Sangma, in a police lock-up at Dimapur Police Station (West) on 22.8.1989. The petition is preferred by the spouse of late Francis Sangma.2. On 22.8.1989, the husband of the petitioner was arrested by police personnels led by Police Inspector, K.K. Angami, in connection with Dimapur Police (West) case No. 9(8) of 1989 under Sections 395/397, Indian Penal Code, on suspicion. On the same night, the husband of the petitioner was beaten to death. It is stated in para 4 of the petition that, on the fateful night, the following police personnels were on duty: (1) Nrithung, (2) Paojomong, (3) Benkikaba, (4) Susukamba. Thereafter, the body of the deceased, late Francis Sangma, was carried in a vehicle bearing No. NLN 386 (TATA) from Dimapur to Hojai for burial. A certificate to this fact...
New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Md. Makubur Rahman and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Mar-18-1993
U.L. Bhat, C.J.1. Appellant is an insurer which has been directed by the Tribunal to pay compensation to the claimants by an award made under Section 168 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short 'the Act'). Appellant has not made deposit as contemplated under first proviso to Section 173(1) of the Act. Registry has raised objection to the maintainability of the appeal. We have heard learned Counsel for the appellant.2. Sub-section (1) of Section 173 of the Act states that, subject to the provisions of Sub-section (2), any person aggrieved by an award of a Claims Tribunal may, within ninety days from the date of the award, prefer appeal to the High Court. The first proviso to sub-section reads as follows:Provided that no appeal by the person who is required to pay any amount in terms of such award shall be entertained by the High Court unless he has deposited with it twenty-five thousand rupees or fifty per cent of the amount so awarded, whichever is less, in the manner directed by ...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »