Guwahati Court June 1996 Judgments

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. India Tea and Timber Trading Co.

Court: Guwahati

D.N. Baruah, J. 1. After the order passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, the Revenue requested the Tribunal to refer the following questions under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short, 'the Act'): '(1) Whether the Tribunal did not err in law as well as in facts in accepting the assessee's claim that in the subsequent years production was resumed when in fact the factory did not work in subsequent years also ? (2) Whether the Tribunal was justified in fact as well as in law in allowing depreciation to the assessee, when the factory did not work during the relevant year ? (3) Whether the Tribunal did not err in law as well as in facts in holding impliedly that there was passive use of machinery during the year ?' 2. However, the Tribunal referred only questions Nos. 2 and 3 for opinion of this court. 3. The facts for the purpose of answering the said questions may be stated as follows : The assessee is a firm registered under the Indian Partnership Act. The fir...

Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. India Tea and Timber Trading Co.

Court: Guwahati

Reported in: (1997)137CTR(Gau)334

D. N. BARUAH, J. :After the order passed by the Tribunal, the Revenue requested the Tribunal to refer the following questions under s. 256 of the IT Act, 1961 (for short, 'the Act') :'(1) Whether the Tribunal did not err in law as well as in facts in accepting the assessees claim that in the subsequent years production was resumed when, in fact, the factory did not work in subsequent years also ?(2) Whether the Tribunal was justified in fact as well as in law in allowing depreciation to the assessee, when the factory did not work during the relevant year ?(3) Whether the Tribunal did not err in law as well as in facts in holding impliedly that there was passive use of machinery during the year ?'However, the Tribunal referred only questions Nos. 2 and 3 for opinion of this Court.2. The facts for the purpose of answering the said questions may be stated as follows :The assessee is a firm registered under the Indian Partnership Act. The firm follows the mercantile system of accounting. I...

Jugal Chandra Saikia and anr. Vs. State of Assam and anr.

Court: Guwahati

J.N. Sharma, J.1. In both the petitions, the orders of compulsory retirement of the petitioners have been challenged. The petitioners in both the cases were officers of the Veterinary Department.2. In Civil Rule No. 1597/1994, the petitioner is Mr. J.C. Saikia. The order passed is at Annexure-K to the writ application by which the petitioner was retired compulsorily. That is quoted below:'In exercise of the powers conferred under FR 56(b) the Governor of Assam hereby requires Dr. Jugal Chandra Saikia, Director, Institute of Farm Management, Rani (under suspension), a Member of the Assam Animal Husbandry, Veterinary and Dairying Service, who has already attained the age of 50 years, to retire from service with immediate effect, in public interest.A Banker's Cheque bearing No............ dated April 11, 1994 for Rs. 19,470/- (Rupees Nineteen Thousand Four Hundred Seventy) only, being three months' gross salary which is admissible to Dr. Jugal Chandra Saikia, is enclosed.'3. In Civil Rul...

Assam Salt Merchant's Association Vs. State of Assam and Anr.

Court: Guwahati

J.N. Sarma, J. 1. This writ application has been filed challenging the Notification dated 11-12-1995 issued by the State of Assam whereby price of iodized salt was refixed with effect from 18-9-1995. It is stated that this price was fixed without taking into consideration the relevant factors and without even considered the statutory price, namely, of Railway freight, cost of loading and unloading etc. The petitioner further prayed that freight should be considered on 'to payee' basis. On 15-3-1991Government issued a notification constituting a committee for fixation of the price of the salt. The said committee includes at least two representatives of the petitioners. The committee held meeting and discussions were held about fixation of the price of salt. The Committee fixed the price of salt, the ex-Railway Yard price was fixed at Rs. 57.52P per 75 Kg Bag of iodized salt in respect of Zone-A. On 18-8-1994. the authority issued a letter refixing the price of salt on 1-4-1994 which w...

Yanger Jamir T. and anr. Vs. Nagaland Plantation Crop Development Corp ...

Court: Guwahati

Patnaik, J. 1. This is an appeal against the judgment dated February 24, 1993 of the learned single Judge in Civil Rule No. 15(K)92 of the Kohima Bench of this Court. 2-3. The facts briefly are that on February 3, 1982, the two appellants were appointed as Assistant Plantation Managers under the Nagaland Plantation Crops Development Corporation Limited (for short 'the Corporation'). But their services were sought to be terminated with effect from May 10, 1988 by a month's notice issued by the Chairman of the Corporation on April 6, 1988. The appellants challenged the said notice of termination in Civil Rule No. 1238/ 88 which was renumbered in the Kohima Bench of this Court as Civil Rule No. 68(K)89 and by judgment dated September 30, 1991 of this Court, the said notice of termination dated April 6, 1988 was set aside and the Corporation was directed to reinstate the appellants in service. Pursuant to the said judgment dated Septemebr 30, 1991 of this Court, the two appellants were r...

Ramesh Ch. Deb Vs. Barindra Kr. Chakraborty

Court: Guwahati

N.S. Singh, J. 1. This second appeal arises from the judgment dated 9th May, 1984 and the order signed on 26th June, 1984 passed by the learned District Judge, North Tripura, Kailashahar in Title Appeal No. 1 of 1982, Miscellaneous Appeal No. 1 of 1982 partly affirming the judgment and order passed by the learned Subordinate Judge, North Tripura, Kailashahar in Civil Misc. Case No. 23 of 1979 allowing the application for restitution of possession under S. 144, C.P.C. in respect of the suit land in Title Suit No. 1 of 1966 in favour of the defend ant-respondent; and, remanding the case to the learned Trial Court with regard to the determination of the amount of mesne profit. 2. The facts of the case in as hort compass are as follows: The present appellant as a plaintiff instituted a case being Title Suit No. 1 of 1966 in the Court of the Additional Subordinate Judge, West Tripura, Agartala for a declaration of his right, title and interest over the suit land measuring 11 Kanis 5 Gand...

Super Candles and anr. Vs. Mahabir Candle Works and anr.

Court: Guwahati

J.N. Sarma, J. 1. This appeal has been filed against the ex-parte order dated 25th March/96 in T.S. No. I of 1996 by the Learned District Judge, Kamrup. 2. A suit was filed by the respondents for declaration and permanent injunction and for rendition of accounts under Section 29 for restraining infringement and under Section 27(2), Section 105(C) & Section 106 alleging passing off under Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 (hereinafter called the Act). The following reliefs were prayed for: (1) For permanent injunction restraining the defendants their servants, agents, atterneys etc. from manufacturing selling and/or offering for sale directly or indirectly dealing in candles under the trade mark PRINCE FIGHTER or any other trade mark as may be deceptively similar to the trade Mark ROCKET & DEVICE of the Rocket and particular get up and passing of the candles of the defendants as and for that of the plaintiffs. (ii) For declaration that the plaintiffs and their users of fra...

Smt. Kamini Bala Talukdar Vs. State of Assam and ors.

Court: Guwahati

J.N. Sarma, J.1. The allegation in this case is that one Sudhir Talukdar aged about 27 years who was the second son of Sri Madhab Chandra Talukdar was killed by the police in front of this house oh 3-6-95. Sudhir passed the HSLC examination in the year 1984, but could not prosecute his studies due to adverse pecuniary condition of his father.2. The admitted position in this case is that Sudhir is a hardcore ULFA, but the question is that whether the killing of Sudhir was a diabolic murder or that was in pursuance of an attempt to apprehend him. The allegation is that on the morning of 3-6-95 at about 11.30 a.m. when Sudhir along with 3 other persons were playing carrom by the side of public road in front of his house, at that time 8 persons in civil dress came to the spot on 4 motor cycles and on being pointed out by one of them Sudhir was caught by another and one of the eight persons brought out a revolver and fired on Sudhir. Sudhir being injured ran towards the 'bari' behind his r...

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Keshrichand Jaisukhlal

Court: Guwahati

D.N. Baruah, J. 1. At the instance of the Revenue, the following question has been referred to this court by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short, 'the Act'), for opinion of this court : ' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in view of Rule 6DD(j) of the Income-tax Rules, 1962, the Tribunal did not err in law in deleting the disallowance of Rs. 25,962 made under Section 40A(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for cash payment made by the assessee for expenditure incurred in purchasing from Tarachand Pushraj ?'2. The facts for the purpose of answering this question may be stated as follows : The respondent is an assessee under the Act. It made certain payments in cash beyond the limit prescribed under Section 40A(3) of the Act. The Income-tax Officer disallowed such payment. On appeal, the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) observed that though the genuineness of the transaction and identity of the payee ...

Controller of Estate Duty Vs. Shri Shew Kishan Bahety

Court: Guwahati

D.N. Baruah, J. 1. By judgment and order dated August 26, 1988, in Civil Rule No. 21(M) of 1977, this court directed the Tribunal to refer the following question for the opinion of this court. Pursuant to the said direction, the said question has been referred under the Estate Duty Act, 1953 (for short, 'the Act'), as noted below : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and, on a proper construction of Section 5 of the Estate Duty Act, 1953, the share of the deceased in the value of the goodwill of the firm is not includi-ble in the principal value of the estate of the deceased and whether the Tribunal was justified in upholding the order of the Appellate Controller of the Estate Duty deleting Rs. 36,440 as added by the Assistant Controller of Estate Duty in the assessment ?' 2. The matter relates to the estate of one Champalal Baheti, partner of a firm, Kasturchand Champalal Marwaripatty, Jorhat. The said Baheti was having 30 per cent. share in the said firm. He...