Guwahati Court October 2001 Judgments

income Tax Officer Vs. Lalit Kumar Agarwalla

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Guwahati

1. All these three appeals are filed by the Revenue against the orders of the Dy. CIT(A). The appeal No. 27(Gau) and 28(Gau) of 1999 relate to the asst. yr. 1994-95 and the appeal No. 29 (Gau) of 1999 relates to the asst. yr 1995-96. As many as four grounds of appeal were taken in all the three appeals of two different assessees. However, in substance all the 4 grounds of appeal are related to one ground regarding the validity of the order of the Dy. CIT(A) in cancelling the assessment order on the ground that the same is null and void. In all the three appeals the assessee did not choose to appear even after service of notice. However, a written submission was filed on behalf of the assessee. After considering the written submission and considering the argument of the learned Departmental Representative we dispose of the three appeals by this common order for the sake of convenience.2. The learned Departmental Representative submitted that the AO selected all the three cases for scru...

income Tax Officer Vs. Dr. N.C. Doka

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Guwahati

Reported in: (2002)82ITD275(Gau.)

1. The Revenue has preferred this appeal against the order of the CIT(A) in respect of asst. yr. 1993-94. The appeal is time-barred by 11 days. The Revenue has filed a petition for condonation of delay. We are satisfied that sufficient cause has been shown in the condonation petition the delay is condoned and admit the appeal for hearing on merit.2. The only grievance of the Revenue in this appeal is the deletion of Rs. 60,147 which was added by the AO as undisclosed income of the assessee. Mr: B.B. Deb, the learned Departmental Representative, drawn our attention to the order of the first appellate authority at para 3.2 and submitted that the assessee has produced the statement of accounts for the year ended 31st March, 1988. The learned Departmental Representative further submitted that a copy of the petition dt. 30th Dec., 1994, which was filed by the assessee before the Dy. CIT, Dibrugarh Range, Dibrugarh, was also filed before the first appellate authority. The first appellate au...

ito Vs. Lalit Kumar Agarwalla

Court: Guwahati

N.R.S. Ganesan J.M.All these three appeals are filed by the revenue against the orders of the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals). The Appeal No. 27(Gau) and 28(Gau) of 1999 relate to the assessment year 1994-95 and the appeal No. 29 (Gau) of 1999 relates to the assessment year 1995-96. As many as four grounds of appeal were taken in all the three appeals of two different assessees. However, in substance, all the 4 grounds of appeal are related to one ground regarding the validity of the order of the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) in cancelling the assessment order on the ground that the same is null and void. In all the three appeals, the assessee did not choose to appear even after service of notice. However, a written submission was filed on behalf of the assessee. After considering the written submission and considering the argument of the learned Departmental Representative, we dispose of the three appeals by this common order for the sake of convenience.2. The learned Departmental Repr...

income Tax Officer Vs. Hemodhar Gogaoi

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Guwahati

1. This appeal is preferred by the Department against the order of the CIT(A) in respect of the asst. yr. 1992-93. In spite of service of notice the assessee has not appeared before this Tribunal at the time of hearing. However, the appeal is disposed of after hearing the Departmental Representative.2. The first ground of appeal is regarding the direction of the CIT(A) to take into account the interest income on maturity of FDRs. The AO found that the accrued interest was shown at Rs. 9,000 only. However, according to the AO the interest was higher. According to the AO normally on long-term deposit the bank allowed 10 per cent interest per annum. Accordingly the AO added a sum of Rs. 22,000 towards interest income on estimate basis at the rate of 10 per cent per annum on the deposit of Rs. 2,20,000. The learned Departmental Representative, Mr.P. Sarma, submitted that the CIT(A) has committed a mistake in directing the AO to take into account the interest income on maturity of FDRs. 3....

ito Vs. Hemodhar Gogaoi

Court: Guwahati

N.R.S. Ganesan, J.M.This appeal is preferred by the department against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) in respect of the assessment year 1992-93. In spite of service of notice, the assessee has not appeared before this Tribunal at the time of hearing. However, the appeal is disposed of after hearing the Departmental Representative.2. The first ground of appeal is regarding the direction of the Commissioner (Appeals) to take into account the interest income on maturity of FDRs. The assessing officer found that the accrued interest was shown at Rs. 9,000 only. However, according to the assessing officer, the interest was higher. According to the assessing officer normally on long-term deposit the bank allowed 10 per cent interest per annum. Accordingly the assessing officer added a sum of Rs. 22,000 towards interest income on estimate basis at the rate of 10 per cent per annum on the deposit of Rs. 2,20,000. The learned Departmental Representative, Mr. P. Sarma, submitted that t...

Aravind Goekna and anr. Vs. Sushila Devi Tibrewalla and ors.

Court: Guwahati

Ranjan Gogoi, J. 1. Aggrieved by the grant of injunction, the instant appeal has been preferred by the principal defendants in Title Suit No. 6(SH)/2001 now pending before the learned Assistant District Judge, Shillong. The facts, in brief, may be noticed as hereunder.2. The Respondents No. 1, 2 and 3 in the present appeal instituted a suit being Title Suit No. 6(SH)/2001 in the Court of learned Assistant District Judge, Shillong praying for declaration and perpetual injunction against the present appellants i.e. the defendants in the suit from proceeding with the construction undertaken by the appellants/defendants. Along with the plaint, the respondents/ plaintiffs had filed an application under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure praying for injunction. Ad interim order of injunction was also prayed for. The case of the respondents/ plaintiffs in the suit and in the injunction petition filed, in short, is that they are the owners of a dwelling house situated at Pol...

Sibo Kurmi and anr. Vs. State of Assam

Court: Guwahati

A.H. Saikia, J. 1. The Judgment & Order dated 5.4.2000 passed by the learned Sessions Judge at Golaghat in Sessions case No. 72/98 under Section 302, IPC is under challenge in this Criminal Appeal.2. The appellants were found guilty under Section 302, IPC for committing the murder of the deceased Sri Aghanu Kurmi and consequently both of them were convicted and sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs. 500 each in default further rigorous imprisonment for six months. The prosecution case as emerged out of the F.I.R. as well as the evidence of PW 4, Horicharan Kurmi, is that on 19.6.1997 there was a religious function arranged by female devotees at a village Namghar. The said function, was known as 'Gopini Sabah'. As the deceased Aghanu Kurmi was the care taker of the Namghar the female devotees called him to the Namghar to chant panegyric of Goddess Seetala. The panegyric was to be chanted for three days. In the last night of the function, i.e., 19.6.1997 a...

Naba Kumar Das Vs. State of Assam

Court: Guwahati

A.K. Patnaik, J.1. These two appeals are against the judgment dated 12.12.1997 of the learned Sessions Judge, Bongaigoan, in Sessions Case No. 20(BGN)/97 convicting the appellants under Sections 376/34, 302/ 34 and 201/34, IPC. By the said judgment, the learned Sessions Judge imposed on each of the appellants the sentences of imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 25,000 in default to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for three years by each of them for the offence under Section 376/34, IPC, sentences of life imprisonment and fine of Rs. 25,000 in default to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for three years by each of them for the offence under Section 302/34, IPC, Considering the aforesaid sentences imposed for the offences under Section 376/34 and 302/34, IPC, the learned Sessions Judgedid not impose any further sentence on the appellants for the offence under Section 201/34, IPC. The learned Sessions Judge further ordered that the sentences will run concurrently and half the f...

Murti Dhar Singh and ors. Vs. Vijendra Singh Jafa

Court: Guwahati

A.H. Saikia, J. We have heard Mr. B.D. Goswami, learned counsel for the petitioners. None appears for the respondent. 1. This revision petition has been placed before the Division Bench of this Court on being referred by the learned Single Judge (H. Mr. Justice A.P. Singh since retired) by his order dated 18.7.1997 for referring the matter for a final decision by a larger Bench by examining the correctness of this judgment and order delivered by the learned single Judge in Haji Sabajiuddin v. Banamali Das reported in (1982) 1 GLR 722 since the learned single Judge respectfully disagreed with the said judgment while deciding the Crl. Misc. Case No. 107/ 97 (Crl. Misc. Case No. 4(SH)/97) arising out ox Crl. Revision No. 459/96 wherein the solitary quest ion of law involved was as to whether the Court has the power to review its Judgment or final order disposing of a case by exercising inherent power under Section 482 of the code of Criminal Procedure (for short the 'code') notwithstan...

Jinna Abdur Rahim Vs. State of Assam and ors.

Court: Guwahati

A.H. Saikia, J. 1. Heard Mr. A.B. Chowdhury learned counsel for the petitioner and also heard Mr. B. Chowdhury, learned State-counsel for the respondents.2. By this writ petition the petitioner has challenged his suspension order dated 28.1.1997 by which he was put under suspension pending drawal of departmental proceeding with effect from the date of his arrest in connection with Boko P. S. Case No. 181/96.3. The case of the petitioner is that he has been working as an Assistant Teacher at No. 1 Dakhin Rangapani L.P. School under Boko Police Station in the district of Kamrup. On 13.12.1996 he was arrested along with some other persons in connection with Boko P.S. Case No. 181/96 registered under Sections 147/325/365/302/201 IPC on the basis of an FIR lodged with the police on 20.10.1996 by one Md. Kaser Ali. Immediately after his arrest the petitioner moved a bail application for his release before the competent Court and he was granted the privilege to go on bail, But surprisingly ...