Guwahati Court November 1999 Judgments
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Prahlad Rai Todi (Legal Representative ...
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Nov-20-1999
P.G. Agarwal, J. 1. Heard Mr. D. Sur, learned counsel for the Revenue, and Mr. R.K. Joshi, learned counsel for the assessee. 2. In respect of the assessment years 1953-54 and 1954-55 appeals were preferred by the Revenue before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Gauhati Bench, Guwahati, being I. T. A. Nos. 537 and 538 (Gauhati) of 1990. These appeals were heard and vide order dated September 24, 1993, both the appeals were allowed. Thereafter the assessee filed a miscellaneous application challenging the order passed on September 24, 1993, and vide order dated December 20, 1994, the learned Tribunal passed the following order : 'In our opinion, the orders of the Tribunal passed on September 24, 1993, should be recalled for reconsideration. We, therefore, recall this order and direct the Registry to post the case for fresh hearing.' 3. The Revenue has filed the present application stating, inter alia, that the order passed by the Tribunal on September 24, 1993, was a final order and ...
Tag this Judgment!Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax (Assessment) and ors. Vs. Naginimara ...
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Nov-20-1999
D.N. Chowdhury, J.1. The appeal by the Revenue has arisen out of and is directed against the judgment and order of the learned single judge dated March 8, 1996 (see ), whereby the learned single judge allowed the writ petition by quashing the proceeding against the respondents under Section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. In the aforesaid proceeding the controversy pertained to the assessment for the year 1985-86. The writ petitioner-company (respondent herein) submitted its return showing a net loss of Rs. 9,29,500. The company also filed its audited profit and loss account and the balance-sheet and all other relevant documents. In the balance-sheet along with the return, the petitioner-company showed an amount of Rs. 31,58,700 received from the Forest Utilisation Officer (hereinafter referred to as 'FUO'), under the head 'Current liability' as advance received from the FUO. In the course of the assessment proceeding, the Assessing Officer issued notice on the company in exercise of...
Tag this Judgment!Nambam Remeshwor Singh Vs. State of Manipur and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Nov-12-1999
N.S. Singh, J. 1. The impugned memorandum dated 6th October, 1997 bearing No.28/2/92-Power, the Office order/letter dated 1st August, 1998 bearing No.1/10/(9)/92-CE(P)/5239-40 and office order/letter dated 8th August, 1997 bearing No.4/1(39)/97-CE(P)/4923-25 pertaining to the Departmental Proceedings as against the writ petitioner as well as withholding the pensionery benefits of the writ petitioner as in Annexures-A/4, A/6 and A/7 are the subject-matters under challenge in this writ petition.2. Supporting the case of the writ petitioner, Mr. L. Nandakumar Singh, learned senior Advocate contended that the petitioner retired from service as Executive Engineer under the respondents with effect from 30th April, 1997 on attaining his age of superannuation and, that the petitioner before his retirement from service, the respondent No. 1 issued a letter dated 21st March, 1997 requesting All Commissioners/Secretaries, Govt. of Manipur, All Head of Departments, Manipur, All Deputy Commissio...
Tag this Judgment!State of Manipur and ors. Vs. M. Irabot Singh
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Nov-03-1999
H.K. Sema, J. 1. This appeal has been referred to me as the (3rd Judge) for opinion by Hon'ble the Chief Justice by its order dated 5.9.1999 in view of the dissenting Judgment of the Division Bench consisting of Hon'ble Mr. Justice P.K. Sarkar and Hon'ble Mr. Justice H.K.K.Singh.2. The undisputed facts leading to the filing of the writ petition and the present appeal are these : Writ petitioner (Respondent herein) joined the Government service as Lecturer in Hindi on 7.8.1968. His date of birth recorded at the time of his entering into service on 7.8.1968 was 1.9.1940. Thereafter, writ petitioner was appointed as Lecturer in Manipur on 25.9.1968. However, his date of birth is maintained as on 1.9.1940. By an impugned notice dated 27.6.1998 (Annexure-5 in the writ petition), he was ordered to be retired on superannuation w.e.f. 31.8.1998 taking his date of birth as on 1.9.1940. Thereafter, petitioner filed a representation dated 9.7.1998 addressed to the Director of Education(s) Gover...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›