Guwahati Court March 1996 Judgments

Chongtham Gulamani Singh Vs. Koijam Ibotomi Singh

Court: Guwahati

N. Surjamani Singh, J. 1. This revision petition underSection 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure arises from the order dated 2nd March, 1996 passed by the learned Muhsiff, Imphal, Manipur in Judicial Misc. Case No. 32/95/ 138 (A)/98 (Land reference C.A. No. 5 of 1995) by which the prayer for amendment of the written statement made by the defendant was allowed. 2. Heard Shri L. Nandakumar Singh, learned senior counsel for the petitioner as well as Shri N. Kerani Singh, learned senior counsel for the respondent. 3. At the very outset Shri L. Nandakumar Singh, learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits that a material irregularity has been committed by the learned Munsiff, Imphal while passing the impugned order dated 2-3-1996 in the above Judicial Misc. Case No. 32 of 1995 allowing the prayer for amendment of the written statement inasmuch as the learned Munsiff allowed the defendant to displace the plaintiff completely from admission made by the defendant in his written stateme...

income Tax Officer Vs. Meghalaya Bonded Warehouse

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Guwahati

Reported in: (1997)60ITD219(Gau.)

1. This appeal filed by the revenue is barred by limitation by 766 days. The order of the first appellate authority was communicated to the concerned Commissioner of Income-tax under section 250(7) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, on 19-8-1988. As per section 253(3) of the Act, an appeal should be filed within 60 days of the date on which the order sought to be appealed against is communicated to the Commissioner of Income-tax. According to the registry of the Tribunal the appeal ought to have been filed on or before 18th October, 1988, as the period of 60 days would expire on 18th October, 1988. As the appeal papers were filed in the office of the Tribunal on 26-11- 1990, the appeal was treated as barred by limitation by 766 days and put up before us. The Departmental Representative has filed a petition for condonation of delay which reads as under : "I like to submit the application for certified copy was made on 1-10-1988 in the above-mentioned case which was within time and the certif...

Bhola Nath Majumdar Vs. Income Tax Officer and ors.

Court: Guwahati

S. L. SARAF, J. :By these two writ applications, the petitioner had challenged the notices issued under s. 148 of the IT Act, 1961, by the respondents after a period of four years from the date of the assessment. The notices relate to the asst. yrs. 1984-85 and 1985-86. From the notices dt. 13th Dec., 1990, under s. 148 of the IT Act, 1961, it appears that the said notices were issued alleging that the ITO had reason to believe that the income for the asst. yrs. 1984-85 and 1985-86 escaped assessment. As such, the said officer was entitled to reassess the income of the assessee for the said two assessment years. The said notices contain a further sentence relating to the obtaining of the necessary satisfaction of the Dy. CIT for issuance of such notices. The said notices were challenged by the petitioner by a letter dt. 28th Dec., 1990, whereby the petitioner stated that the conditions precedent for assumption of jurisdiction under s. 147(a) of the Act were not satisfied and as such t...

Bhola Nath Majumdar Vs. Income Tax Officer and ors.

Court: Guwahati

Reported in: (1997)137CTR(Gau)198

S. L. SARAF, J. :By these two writ applications, the petitioner had challenged the notices issued under s. 148 of the IT Act, 1961, by the respondents after a period of four years from the date of the assessment. The notices relate to the asst. yrs. 1984-85 and 1985-86. From the notices dt. 13th Dec., 1990, under s. 148 of the IT Act, 1961, it appears that the said notices were issued alleging that the ITO had reason to believe that the income for the asst. yrs. 1984-85 and 1985-86 escaped assessment. As such, the said officer was entitled to reassess the income of the assessee for the said two assessment years. The said notices contain a further sentence relating to the obtaining of the necessary satisfaction of the Dy. CIT for issuance of such notices. The said notices were challenged by the petitioner by a letter dt. 28th Dec., 1990, whereby the petitioner stated that the conditions precedent for assumption of jurisdiction under s. 147(a) of the Act were not satisfied and as such th...

Naginimara Veneer and Saw Mills Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of I ...

Court: Guwahati

D.N. Baruah, J.1. The petitioner in this application under Article 226 of the Constitution has challenged annexure-5 notice, dated March 30/ 31, 1989, issued by the Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax (Assessment), Special Range-II, Guwahati, in the exercise of the power under Section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 1985-86 proposing to reassess the income for the said assessment year and requiring the petitioner to submit a return of the income in the prescribed form.2. For the purpose of disposal of this writ petition, the facts may be narrated as under : The petitioner is a private limited company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956. The company carries on the business of manufactureand sale of commercial plywood, sawn timber, railway sleepers and other allied products. The factory of the petitioner-company is situated at Naginimara in the District of Mon, Nagaland.3. The petitioner-company is an assessee under the Income-tax Act. Notice dated March 30...

Commissioner of Gift-tax Vs. S. N. Zaman and S. M. Elahi.

Court: Guwahati

D. N. BARUAH, J. :On the application of the Revenue under s. 26(1) of the GT Act, 1958 (for short, 'the Act'), the following questions have been referred by the Tribunal for opinion of this Court :'1. Whether the Tribunal was justified in facts as well as in law in holding that so-called agreement dt. 5th Dec., 1979, is a valid family settlement, specially in view of the fact that it was made simply to avoid future disputes, between the two sons of the late Rahim Buksh ?2. Whether the Tribunal did not err in facts as well as in law in applying the ratio of the decision of the Gauhati High Court in the case of Ziauddin Ahmed vs . CGT especially in view of the fact that in that case there was a family dispute which took a serious turn in 1959 to put an end to which the settlement was made whereas in the instant case there is no such family dispute ?3. Whether under the facts and circumstances of the case, the provision of s. 2(xxiv)(d) of the GT Act, 1958, is not applicable ?'2. For the...

Commissioner of Gift-tax Vs. S. N. Zaman and S. M. Elahi.

Court: Guwahati

Reported in: (1997)137CTR(Gau)385

D. N. BARUAH, J. :On the application of the Revenue under s. 26(1) of the GT Act, 1958 (for short, 'the Act'), the following questions have been referred by the Tribunal for opinion of this Court :'1. Whether the Tribunal was justified in facts as well as in law in holding that so-called agreement dt. 5th Dec., 1979, is a valid family settlement, specially in view of the fact that it was made simply to avoid future disputes, between the two sons of the late Rahim Buksh ?2. Whether the Tribunal did not err in facts as well as in law in applying the ratio of the decision of the Gauhati High Court in the case of Ziauddin Ahmed vs . CGT especially in view of the fact that in that case there was a family dispute which took a serious turn in 1959 to put an end to which the settlement was made whereas in the instant case there is no such family dispute ?3. Whether under the facts and circumstances of the case, the provision of s. 2(xxiv)(d) of the GT Act, 1958, is not applicable ?'2. For the ...