Guwahati Court July 2002 Judgments

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Dr. M.L. Agarwalla

Court: Guwahati

D. Biswas, J. 1. In compliance with the order dated August 11, 2000, passed by the Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No. 4560 of 2000 arising out of S. L. P. (C) No. 4067 of 2000 directed against the judgment and order of this court in Civil Rule No. 14(M) of 1988, the Revenue has formulated the following question of law and referred the same to this court for decision : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is correct in law in allowing investment allowance on ultrasound medical diagnostic electrical equipment, air-conditioner and servo voltage stabilizer ?'2. The assessee, Dr. M.L. Agarwalla, is a qualified radiologist engaged in the business of x-ray diagnosis since the assessment year 1981-82. For the assessment year 1989-90, the assessee claimed deduction under Section 32A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, in respect of plant and machinery purchased and installed by him in the aforesaid business. The Assessing Officer rejected the claim of the assessee...

Rabindra Nath Hazarika Vs. Phulti Hazarika Alias Phulti Bania

Court: Guwahati

J.N. Sarma, J. 1. This is an appeal under Section 299 of the Indian Succession Act. It has been filed against the judgment dated 23-6-1997 passed by the learned Additional District Judge. Nagaon in Title Suit No. 19/1995.2. It is alleged that a 'will' was left by one Suryamal Hazarika and the beneficiary of that 'will' was the present appellant Rabindra Nath Hazarika. He filed an application before the learned District Judge at Nagaon for grant of Letters of Administration and in that case he did not make the heirs of late Suryamal Hazarika, party and accordingly the Letters of Administration was issued ex parte. Thereafter, the daughter of late Suryamal Hazarika filed an application for revocation of Letters of Administration issued by the Court that has registered as Misc (J) case No. 92 of 1992, that was allowed and the Letters of Administration which was granted earlier was revoked.Thereafter the present application was proceeded before the learned District Judge at Nagaon for gr...

Basant Nath Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.

Court: Guwahati

Amitava Roy, J.1. This application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India records a challenge to the decision taken by the respondents in a Geneal Court Martial, holding the petitioner guilty of committing of civil offence, i.e., murder, punishable under the Army Act, 1950 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) imposing on him the sentence of dismissal from service and imprisonment for life.2. We have heard Ms. Rita Das, Mazumdar, advocate for the petitioner as well as Mr. P.N. Choudhury, Addl. Central Govt. Standing Counsel for the respondents.3. The fascicule of facts necessary for the disposal of the instant application can be presented, thus :The petitioner who at the relevant time was a permanent Jawan of 28 Assam Rifles, being No. 2851019 Rifleman (General Duty), a person subject to Army Act as Sepoy under Section 4(1) of the Act, read with SRO 117 datred 28.3.1960, SRO 318 dated 6.12.1962 as amended by SRO 325 dated 31.8.1977 was charged as follows to be tried by the Gene...

Assistant Commissioner of Income Vs. Sardar Davinder Singh Kohli

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Guwahati

Reported in: (2003)80TTJ(Gau.)791

1.These are the three appeals filed by the Revenue for the asst. yrs.1992-93, 1993-94 and 1994-95. As the issue involved in all the three appeals are common the same are disposed of by this consolidated order. (i) The CIT(A) erred in law and in facts in directing the AO to accept the storage income as disclosed by the assessee at Rs. 58,000. (ii) The CIT(A) erred in law and in facts in directing the AO to allow interest of Rs. 43,077 payable to M/s Debidutt Poddar & Sons and other relevant expenses.3. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the orders of both the lower authorities in the light of the materials available on record. Briefly the relevant facts of the case are that the assessee owned a commercial property consisting of godown at basement, ground floor and first floor, The assessee had shown income from storage charges received from sundry parties for letting out of the basement as "income from other sources" and claimed therefrom various expenses incurred as d...

Asstt. Cit Vs. Sardar Davinder Singh Kohli

Court: Guwahati

N.S. Saini, A.M.These are the three appeals filed by the revenue for the assessment years 1992-93, 1993-94 and 1994-95. As the issue involved in all the three appeals are common the same are disposed of by this consolidated order.I.T.A. No. 239 (Gau) of 1997Assessment year 1992-932. The grounds of appeal taken in this appeal are :(i) The Commissioner (Appeals) erred in law and in facts in directing the assessing officer to accept the storage income as disclosed by the assessee at Rs. 58,000.(ii) The Commissioner (Appeals) erred in law and in facts in directing the assessing officer to allow interest of Rs. 43,077 payable to M/s. Debidutt Poddar & Sons and other relevant expenses.3. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the orders of both the lower authorities in the light of the materials available on record. Briefly the relevant facts of the case are that the assessee owned a commercial property consisting of godown at basement, ground floor and first floor. The assesse...

Mridul Saikia @ Babu Vs. State of Assam

Court: Guwahati

I.A. Ansari, J. 1. This appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order, dated 31.12.2001, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jorhat, in Sessions Case No. 36 (J.J.) of 2000, convicting the accused-appellant under Section 376 I.P.C. and sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of four years and to pay fine of Rs. 500 and in default, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a further period of three months. 2. Prosecution's case against the accused-appellant, as unfolded at the trial, may, in brief, be stated as follows. The accused appellant is a neighbour of Smt. Mainu Bora @ Munu, a student of class VIII of Mahabandha Tea Garden High School, Jorhat, who is aged about 15 years. The appellant used to teach Munu at her house, On18.6.1999, at noon, while Munu was in her home, the appellant came there and, on finding her alone, had sexual intercourse with her against her will. As a result of sexual intercourse, which the appellant had with Munu, she ...

Brij Ratan Kothari Vs. Aklesh Sahu

Court: Guwahati

J.N. Sarma, J.1. Both the appeals have been filed against the same judgment and decree dated 4th April, 1996 passed by the Asstt. District Judge, Jorhat, in T.A. No. 20 of 1990. By the impugned judgment the learned Judge set aside the earlier judgment and decree dated 3.4.1990 passed by the Munsiff No. 2, Jorhat in T.S. No. 8 of 1981 and he partly decreed the plaintiffs suit, namely decree praying for restoration of the possession of the portion of the land (5 lessas) to the plaintiff and rejected the other claim of the plaintiff.2. Second appeal No. 123/96 has been filed by the defedant against the decree for restroation of possession of 5 lechas of land and Second Appeal No. 139/96 has been filed by the plaintiff against the rejection of the plaintiff's prayer for restoration of other 5 lechas of land. Both the appeals have been heard together and this common judgment shall dispose of both the appeals.3.1 have heard Mr. B.K. Goswami, Learned Advocate for the appellant in S.A. No. 1...

Hindustan Paper Corporation Ltd. Vs. Presiding Officer, Industrial Tri ...

Court: Guwahati

P.G. Agarwal, J.1. Heard Mr. S.N. Sarma, learned senior counsel for the petitioner and Mr. B.N. Sarma, learned senior counsel for the respondents.2. The Management of Hindustan Paper Corporation Ltd. in short 'HPC', filed an application under Section 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, for short 'the Act', seeking approval of its order dated June 1, 1996 removing the respondent workman Jogesar Nath for his alleged unauthorised absence from duty for a period of 75 days. The approval of order of dismissal was sought on the basis of a domestic enquiry held against the petitioner and an application had to be filed as a Reference Case No. 6/92 was pending. The Tribunal vide the impugned order refrained from according approval to the removal order, hence the present application.3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner Management submitted that the Tribunal erred in law in interfering with the proposed punishment purportedly under Section 11-A of the Act as this was an application under Se...

Employees State Insurance Corporation Vs. Surendra Sharma

Court: Guwahati

J.N. Sarma, J. 1. The substantial question of law in this case is that whether the Employees' Insurance Court has the power to review its own judgment, The order impugned in this appeal is an order passed by the Employees' Court on review of its earlier judgment in ESI Case No, 2/93. That was dismissed by the learned Judge on 26.2.96. Thereafter, a misc petition was filed by MC No. 2/96 to review its earlier judgment and that was taken up for disposal by the learned Judge. The learned Judge by judgment dated 3.6.1996 in para 10 held as follows: 'For the foregoing reasons, I hold that the instant petition deserves to be allowed in view of the discovery of new and important matters as aforesaid and in view of the apparent error in the previous ESI Case No. 2/93. Consequently, the said ESI Case No. 2/93 stands allowed and the levies of contribution upon the petitioner by the corporation for the various segregated periods, viz., 4/92 to 10/92, 6.12.1990 to 6.12.1992, 22.5.1991, 1.2.1992 ...

Nandeswar Kalita and ors. Vs. Registrar (Judicial) Gauhati High Court ...

Court: Guwahati

Amitava Roy, J.1. The appellants herein were the petitioners in Civil Rule No. 4538 of 1996 wherein they prayed for an appropriate Writ and/or direction against the official respondents to step up their basic pay to that of their juniors in the cadre of Stenographer Grade-I in service of this court at its principal Seat. The learned Single Judge by judgment and order dated 25.11.1998 has dismissed the writ petition. Being aggrieved, the writ petitioners have preferred this appeal.2. We have heard Mr. D. K. Mishra, learned senior Advocate assisted by Mr. H. Roy and Mr. R. Agarwal, Advocates for the appellants as well as Mr. D. P. Chaliha, learned senior Advocate for the respondent Nos. Mr. B. K. Sarma, learned senior Advocate assisted by Mr. M. K. Choudhury, Advocate for the respondent Nos. 4 to 8 has also been heard.3. The appellants had filed the above Civil Rule contending inter alia, that they were all serving as Grade-I Stenographers in this Court, having been appointed under the ...