Guwahati Court August 1996 Judgments

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Assam Frontier Tea Ltd.

Court: Guwahati

D.N. Baruah, J. 1. In this reference under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act'), the following three questionshave been referred by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal for the opinion of this court : '1. Whether the Tribunal did not err in facts as well as in law in holding that Rule 6AA which was made effective from August 1, 1981, and which was held to be substantive law by the Tribunal itself, would be applicable in respect of pending assessments as on August 1, 1981 ?' 2. Whether the Tribunal did not err in facts as well as in law in holding that Rule 6AA which was stated to be substantive law and which was brought into the statute with effect from August 1, 1981, would apply in respect of expenses incurred on or before June 30, 1980 3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the assessee is entitled to weighted deduction under Section 35(1)(b)(iv) as well as under Section 35(1)(b)(ix) ?' 2...

Assam Frontier Tea Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Taxes and ors.

Court: Guwahati

S. L. SARAF, J. :By this writ application, the petitioner challenges the order passed by the Asstt. Commr. of Taxes(A), Gauhati, respondent No. 1, on 9th June, 1992, and the order passed by the Agrl. ITO on 10th May, 1991, and praying for cancellation of the aforesaid two orders and a further direction that the respondent should allow the deductions in respect of contributions made on account of workmen and staff welfare as the same was incurred wholly and exclusively for earning and deriving the agricultural income under s. 8(2)(f)(vii) of Assam Agrl. IT Act, 1939 (hereinafter referred to as "the State Act").2. The facts in a nutshell are as follows :The petitioner is a public limited company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956, having its registered office at Talap in the District of Tinsukia, Assam. The company has several tea gardens in the State of Assam and engaged in the business of cultivation, manufacture and sale of tea.For the asst. yr. 1984-85, while compu...

Assam Frontier Tea Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Taxes and ors.

Court: Guwahati

S.L. Saraf, J. 1. By this writ application, the petitioner challenges the order passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Taxes (Appeals), Gauhati, respondent No. 1, on June 9, 1992, and the order passed by the Agricultural Income-tax Officer on May 10, 1991, and praying for cancellation of the aforesaid two orders and a further direction that the respondent should allow the deductions in respect of contributions made on account of workmen and staff welfare as the same was incurred wholly and exclusively for earning and deriving the agricultural income under Section 8(2)(f)(vii) of the Assam Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1939 (hereinafter referred to as 'the State Act'). 2. The facts in a nutshell are as follows : The petitioner is a public limited company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956, having its registered office at Talap in the District of Tinsukia, Assam. The company has several tea gardens in the State of Assam and engaged in the business of cultivation, manufacture and...

Assam Frontier Tea Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Taxes and ors.

Court: Guwahati

Reported in: (1997)139CTR(Gau)64

S. L. SARAF, J. :By this writ application, the petitioner challenges the order passed by the Asstt. Commr. of Taxes(A), Gauhati, respondent No. 1, on 9th June, 1992, and the order passed by the Agrl. ITO on 10th May, 1991, and praying for cancellation of the aforesaid two orders and a further direction that the respondent should allow the deductions in respect of contributions made on account of workmen and staff welfare as the same was incurred wholly and exclusively for earning and deriving the agricultural income under s. 8(2)(f)(vii) of Assam Agrl. IT Act, 1939 (hereinafter referred to as 'the State Act').2. The facts in a nutshell are as follows :The petitioner is a public limited company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956, having its registered office at Talap in the District of Tinsukia, Assam. The company has several tea gardens in the State of Assam and engaged in the business of cultivation, manufacture and sale of tea.For the asst. yr. 1984-85, while computing the in...

Khuraijam Somoi Singh Vs. State of Manipur

Court: Guwahati

1. This is an appeal against the conviction of the accused Shri Khuraijam Somoi Singh under Section 302 of the I.P.C. sentencing him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for life passed by Sri Birendra Kr. Sharma, the learned Additional Session Judge, Manipur West, Imphal in Session Trial Case No. 6/91/1191 dated 20-6-1992.2. Prosecution case is that the accused K. Somoi Singh committed the murder of his step-father A. Sarangkhomba Singh of Waikhong Laimanai village by assaulting the deceased with a Haothang (dao) and axe on the 3rd day of December, 1982 at about 12-40 p.m. just in the very house of the deceased. The murder was witnessed by the daughter of the deceased (P.W. 1) and the victim succumbed to injuries on the spot. Local people and police rushed to the spot and the accused was arrested alongwith the weapons. A case was registered on the complaint of the P.W. 1 and the police commenced investigation and on completion thereof, submitted a charge-sheet against the accused who in t...

Sarda Plywood Industries Ltd. and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and or ...

Court: Guwahati

A.K. Patnaik, J.1. This is an appeal against the judgment and order dated 28-5-96 of the learned single judge dismissing Civil Rule No. 5316/95.2. The facts briefly are that M/s Sarda Plywood Industries Limited (for short 'the appellant') manufactures and sells a wide variety of plywood products including block boards in its factory at Jaipur in Assam. The appellant filed classification list w.e.f. 1-3-92 declaring that the block boards manufactured in its factory were 'articles of wood not else were specified' as described in heading 44.10 of the Schedule of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 (for short 'the Central Excise Tariff) liable to excise duty at the rate of 15% ad-valorem under Sub-heading 44.10.90 thereof but exempted under notification No. 48/87 dated 1-3-87. But a. show cause notice dated 1-5-92 was issued by the department to the appellant to show cause as to why block boards should not be classified as 'Similar laminated wood' described under heading No. 44.08 of the ...

Sarda Plywood Industries Ltd. and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and or ...

Court: Guwahati

Reported in: 2006(203)ELT28(Gau)

A.K. Patnaik, J.1. This is an appeal against the judgment and order dated 28-5-96 of the learned single judge dismissing Civil Rule No. 5316/95.2. The facts briefly are that M/s Sarda Plywood Industries Limited (for short 'the appellant') manufactures and sells a wide variety of plywood products including block boards in its factory at Jaipur in Assam. The appellant filed classification list w.e.f. 1-3-92 declaring that the block boards manufactured in its factory were 'articles of wood not else were specified' as described in heading 44.10 of the Schedule of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 (for short 'the Central Excise Tariff) liable to excise duty at the rate of 15% ad-valorem under Sub-heading 44.10.90 thereof but exempted under notification No. 48/87 dated 1-3-87. But a. show cause notice dated 1-5-92 was issued by the department to the appellant to show cause as to why block boards should not be classified as 'Similar laminated wood' described under heading No. 44.08 of the C...

Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Arun Kumar Jhunjhunwalla and Sons.

Court: Guwahati

BY THE COURT :In this reference under s. 256(1) of the IT Act, 1961 (for short the "Act"), the following question has been referred for opinion of this Court :"Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in law in holding that the status of the assessee after marriage was that of an HUF and not that of an individual ?"2. The facts may be stated as follows :The assessee is an HUF governed by the Mitakshara school of Hindu Law. The said assessee derived share of income from two firms, namely, Pawan Kumar Arun Kumar & Ors. and H. U. Textile, Shillong. The share income from the said two firms was included in the return filed by the assessee in the status of an HUF. The AO took the view that there should be at least two male members to form an HUF and in the absence of a second male member the assessee could not be assessed in the status of the HUF. The AO also took the view, that the fact that assessee, Arun Kumar Jhunjhunwa...

Tripura Government Employees' Association Vs. State of Tripura and Ors ...

Court: Guwahati

V.K. Khanna, C.J. 1. The petitioner federation is a federation of various Associations of the Tripura Government Employees, Semi-Government Employees and Employees of Tripura Government Undertakings, etc. formed with the prime object of espousing afeeling of fraternity amongst all strata of workers/employees and to secure amongst others their constitutional, legal rights, financial interest and for ameliorating the working condition of its members. Earlier to the present Civil Rule, this very petitioner had approached this High Court by filing Civil Rule No. 58/94 with the grievance that the concerned authorities of the Government had been subjecting the office bearers of the petitioner federation and its Constituent units/associations to indiscriminate transfer, though the same were not called for in administrative exigency or public interest, whereas, the employees and office bearers of the Tripura Employees Co-ordinating Committee which was the supporter of the Government in power...

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Arun Kumar Jhunjhunwalla and Sons

Court: Guwahati

1. In this reference under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short the 'Act'), the following question has been referred for opinion of this court : ' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in law in holding that the status of the assessee after marriage was that of a Hindu undivided family and not that of an individual ?'2. The facts may be stated as follows : The assessee is a Hindu undivided family governed by the Mitakshara school of Hindu law. The said assessee derived share of income from two firms, namely, Pawan Kumar Arun Kumar and others and H. U. Textile, Shillong. The share income from the said two firms was included in the return filed by the assessee in the status of a Hindu undivided family. The Assessing Officer took the view that there should be at least two male members to form a Hindu undivided family and in the absence of a second male member the assessee could not be assessed in the status of the Hindu und...