Guwahati Court September 1996 Judgments

Yengkhom Kunjo Singh Vs. the Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. and ors.

Court: Guwahati

Reported in: AIR1997Gau106

1. These 2 (two) Civil Rules are interlinked and as such, they arc being disposed of by this common judgment.2. The dispute involved in this writ petitions is with regard to the distributorship of L.P.G. in Kakching area of Thoubal District, Manipur. It is stated that the petitioner is a Graduate in Electrical Engineering and he passed the B.E. (Elect.) from Saurashtra University in the year 1990 but since the petitioner did not get any employment he has been earning his livelihood by doing cultivation. Pursuant to the public notice dated 4-10-1995, inviting application for appointment of distributorship for Indane of Kakching area, the petitioner applied for the same. In the said notice the following eligibility createria has been laid down in Clause 2(d) to 2(g). The relevant portion runs from 2(d) to 2(g) as under:--"2(d). Resident of Thoubal District for a period not less than 5 years immediately proceeding the date of application.(e) Having family (as defined in the application fo...

Yengkhom Kunjo Singh Vs. the Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. and ors.

Court: Guwahati

Reported in: AIR1997Gau106

ORDERH.K. Sema, J.1. These 2 (two) Civil Rules are interlinked and as such, they arc being disposed of by this common judgment.2. The dispute involved in this writ petitions is with regard to the distributorship of L.P.G. in Kakching area of Thoubal District, Manipur. It is stated that the petitioner is a Graduate in Electrical Engineering and he passed the B.E. (Elect.) from Saurashtra University in the year 1990 but since the petitioner did not get any employment he has been earning his livelihood by doing cultivation. Pursuant to the public notice dated 4-10-1995, inviting application for appointment of distributorship for Indane of Kakching area, the petitioner applied for the same. In the said notice the following eligibility createria has been laid down in Clause 2(d) to 2(g). The relevant portion runs from 2(d) to 2(g) as under:--'2(d). Resident of Thoubal District for a period not less than 5 years immediately proceeding the date of application.(e) Having family (as defined in ...

A.B.C. India Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax

Court: Guwahati

D.N. Baruah, J.1. As per directions given by this court in Civil Rule No. 1(M) of 1992, the following three questions have been referred by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short, 'the Act'), for opinion of this court : ' 1. On the facts and circumstances of the case where trucks and trailers owned by the assessee-company are used to carry goods of outside parties and the assessee-company earns hire for such carrying of goods in its own trucks and trailers and which business the assessee is carrying on since its inception whether the Tribunal was justified in holding that the trucks are not used in a business for running them on hire and thereby reducing the rate of depreciation already allowed at the higher rate of 40 per cent, to 30 per cent. ? 2. Whether the business of transportation of goods by road, where an assessee books goods at its office premises for transportation thereof by trucks to destination or lifts such goods di...

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Cachar Native Joint Stock Co. Ltd.

Court: Guwahati

D.N. Baruah, J. 1. Pursuant to the orders passed by this court in Civil Rule No. 39(M) of 1979, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (for short, 'the Tribunal'), has referred the following question under Section 256(2) 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 on a proper construction of Section 2(47), Section 45 and Section 48 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, capital gains was not properly assessable for the assessment year 1971-72 in respect of the properties acquired by theGovernment ?'2. The facts are :The assessee is a company incorporated under the Companies Act. Some of the assets belonging to the assessee-company were acquired by the Government under the Requisition and Acquisition Act, 1964. The Income-tax Officer found that the assessee made a claim of Rs. 9,75,947 as compensation. Therefore, he worked out the capital gains arising out of the transfer of the assets at Rs. 3,75,655 a...

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Hotel Belle Vue (P.) Ltd.

Court: Guwahati

D.N. Baruah, J. 1. At the instance of the Revenue, the following two questions have been referred 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 : '(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the assessee is an industrial undertaking and was entitled to investment allowance under Section 32A of the Income-tax Act, 1961?(2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the assessee should be assessed to income-tax at the rate applicable to industrial undertaking and not at the rate applicable to a trading company ?'2. Question No. 1 is related to the assessment year 1982-83 and question No. 2 is related to the assessment year 1987-88.3. The facts for the purpose of answering these questions are :4. The assessee is running a hotel at Guwahati under the name and style 'Hotel Belle Vue (P.) ...

Bengal Tea and Fabrics Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Taxes

Court: Guwahati

D.N. Baruah, J. 1. In this agricultural income-tax reference, the following three questions have been referred under Section 28(2) of the Assam Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1939 (for short, 'the Act'), by the Assam Board of Revenue for opinion of this court :'(I) Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the order of the assessment passed by the Agricultural Income-tax Officer by way of rectification under Section 31(1) of the Assam Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1939, has been rightly set aside when such order had the effect of enhancing the assessment?(II) Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned Board was justified in upholding the order of the Assistant Commissioner of Taxes setting aside the order of rectification passed under Sub-section (1) of Section 31 of the Assam Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1939, which was prima facie violative of the mandatory requirements contained in the provision to the aforesaid Sub-section (1) ?(III) Whether, in the f...

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Assam Hard Board Ltd.

Court: Guwahati

D.N. Baruah, J. 1. At the instance of the Revenue, the following question has been referred by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short, 'the Act'), for the opinion of this court : ' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is correct in fact and in law in holding that the assessee's income from commission amounting to Rs. 15,00,000 is assessable under the head 'Income from business' ?' 2. The facts of the case are that during the previous year relevant to the assessment year 1984-85, the assessee received commission of Rs. 15,00,000 from Aditya Construction and Development Ltd. on a real estate transaction. The assessee claimed such commission as income from business. The Assessing Officer did not accept the same and treated the commission as income from other sources. 3. Being aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). The Commissioner of Income-ta...

Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Arunachal Saw and Veneer Mills (P) Ltd.

Court: Guwahati

D. N. BARUAH, J. :By 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 has not erred in holding that no interest under ss. 139(8) and 217 of the Act can be charged at the time of rectification of the assessment order ?'2. The assessee is a company incorporated under the Companies Act. For the asst. yrs. 1978-79 to 1980-81, the total income of the assessee was assessed at below the limit of taxable income. As there was a late filing of the return and as the income was below the taxable income, the AO did not charge interest under s. 139(8) and s. 217 of the Act in the original assessment. However, a rectification proceeding was initiated after giving due notice and in the said proceeding it was found that the assessee had more income which is taxable under the Act and accordingly interest had been charged under ss. 139(8...

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Highway Construction Co. (P.) Ltd. (No. ...

Court: Guwahati

D.N. Baruah, J.1. At the instance of the Revenue, the following two questions have been referred under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short, 'the Act'), for opinion of this court : ' 1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, when the Tribunal had set aside the order of the Assessing Officer for completion of the assessment de novo, the Assessing Officer while making fresh order is precluded from assessing income which has escaped assessment in the original assessment. If so, whether the Tribunal was legally correct in upholding the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)' order deleting the addition of Rs. 8,96,713 made on account of non-disclosure of total contract receipt by the assessee ?2. Whether in view of question No. 1 above, the Tribunal was legally correct in upholding the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)' order deleting the addition of Rs. 50,310 made on account of undisclosed interest ?'2. The assessee is a company incorporated under...

Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Highway Construction Co. (P) Ltd.

Court: Guwahati

D. N. BARUAH, J. :At the instance of the Revenue, the following two questions have been referred under s. 256(1) of the IT Act, 1961 (for short, 'the Act'), for opinion of this Court :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, when the Tribunal had set aside the order of the AO for completion of the assessment de novo, the AO while making fresh order is precluded from assessing income which has escaped assessment in the original assessment. If so, whether the Tribunal was legally correct in upholding the CIT(A)s order deleting the addition of Rs. 8,96,713 made on account of non-disclosure of total correct receipt by the assessee ?2. Whether in view of question No. 1 above, the Tribunal was legally correct in upholding the CIT(A)s order deleting the addition of Rs. 50,310 made on account of undisclosed interest ?'2. The assessee is a company incorporated under the Companies Act. The AO made assessment in respect of the asst. yr. 1975-76. The assessee, not being sat...