Guwahati Court February 1995 Judgments

Shri Latu Mia Vs. State of Tripura

Court: Guwahati

N.G. Das, J.1. This appeal has been filed by the accused in Sessions Case No. 3(WT/A)87 on the file of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, West Tripura District, Agartala challenging the legality and correctness of his conviction under Section 302 of IPC and sentence of imprisonment for life.2. We have heard Mr. B. Das, the learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant and Mr. S. Das, the learned Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the State of Tripura.3. The facts necessary to be noticed for disposal of this appeal may succinctly be summarised as follows:-The occurrence which led to this prosecution was alleged to have taken place in the residential hut of the appellant who is the husband of the deceased Salema Khatoon in the intervening night of 22-11-S5 and 23-11-85. About 2 years before the occurrence deceased Salema Khatoon was married to the appellant who after 2/3 months of his marriage was separated from the mess of his father and henceforth, it was alleg...

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Samsul Huda

Court: Guwahati

V. Dutta Gyani, J. 1. This is a reference at the instance of the Revenue under Section 256(1) of the Act referring the following question of law for ' this court's opinion : 'Whether the Tribunal did not err in law as well as on the facts to consider that it was fair for both the parties and direct that the assessee should be given an opportunity to establish the loss so that if at all there is business loss and if the other conditions are fulfilled, the loss, if any, may be considered for being carried forward, when there was no decision by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner on the point of determinationand carry forward of loss in all the appeals filed by the Department and to which no cross-objection has been filed by the assessee thereby putting the Department to a more disadvantageous position than it was at the time of filing the appeal ?' 2. The assessee is assessed in the status of an individual under Section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the assessment years 1980...

Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Chandmal Sarawgi and Co.

Court: Guwahati

V. D. GYANI, J. :This is a reference at the instance of the Revenue. The following questions of law are submitted by the Tribunal under s. 256(2) of the IT Act, 1961, for this Courts opinion :'(i) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and on a proper construction of s. 40A(7) of the IT Act, 1961, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the provision for gratuity which was paid to the LIC under the group gratuity scheme was an admissible deduction under s. 37 in the computation of the assessees income ?(ii) Whether the Tribunals decision that s. 40A(7) has no application on the claim of the assessee for deduction of the provision for gratuity is not based on irrelevant consideration or on improper view of facts and law and is not arrived at without having regard to the relevant facts and evidence contained in the order of the authorities below, and whether the decision of the Tribunal is, therefore, not untenable in law ?'2. The assessment year in question is 19...

Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Chandmal Sarawgi and Co.

Court: Guwahati

Reported in: (1998)146CTR(Gau)774

V. D. GYANI, J. :This is a reference at the instance of the Revenue. The following questions of law are submitted by the Tribunal under s. 256(2) of the IT Act, 1961, for this Courts opinion :'(i) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and on a proper construction of s. 40A(7) of the IT Act, 1961, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the provision for gratuity which was paid to the LIC under the group gratuity scheme was an admissible deduction under s. 37 in the computation of the assessees income ?(ii) Whether the Tribunals decision that s. 40A(7) has no application on the claim of the assessee for deduction of the provision for gratuity is not based on irrelevant consideration or on improper view of facts and law and is not arrived at without having regard to the relevant facts and evidence contained in the order of the authorities below, and whether the decision of the Tribunal is, therefore, not untenable in law ?'2. The assessment year in question is 197...

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Tuli Veneer and Plywood Industries

Court: Guwahati

V.D. Gyani, J. 1. The following question of law has been referred to this court for its opinion : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that, notwithstanding the minority of the partners during the major part of the accounting year, registration should be granted as on the date of execution of the partnership deed towards the end of the accounting year, when she became major ?' 2. This case relates to the assessment year 1982-83. The respondent-assessee formed a partnership firm as evidenced by a partnership deed dated February 23, 1982, although the partnership was formed by an oral agreement with effect from January 1, 1981, for carrying on the business of manufacturing of veneer, used by the plywood industry. The firm comprised five partners, namely, (1) Sajjan Kr. Bhajanka, (2) Prem Kr. Bhajanka, (3) Nirmal Kr. Bhajanka, (4) Smt. Bimla Devi Chamaria and (5) Smt. Sangita Devi Chamaria. The assessee-firm applied for regis...

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Ram Krishna Banik

Court: Guwahati

V.D. Gyani, J. 1. This is an application under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, seeking a direction to the Tribunal to submit a statement of the case. 2. The basic facts as necessary for disposal of this application are--the assessee is an employee of the Life Insurance Corporation, working as a Development Officer. Apart from salary, he also received incentive bonus, which was included in the tax declaration certificate issued by the employer. The assessee claimed deduction of 40% of the incentive bonus as expenses. The Income-tax Officer, by an assessment order dated March 2, 1989, disallowed it, but on appeal preferred by the assessee it was allowed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) who held that the incentive bonus received by the assessee was not as an employee but on account of a contractual arrangement, as such, the deduction as claimed by the assessee was allowable. The Revenue preferred an appeal before the Tribunal which was dismissed on July 15, 1991, s...