Guwahati Court November 2006 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Assam Financial Corporation Vs. Dutta Barua and Company and anr.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Nov-23-2006
B.D. Agarwal, J.1. The respondents/ Writ Petitioners had taken an Industrial loan of Rs. 11.75 lakhs from the appellant M/s. Assam Financial Corporation Ltd. (briefly 'AFC hereinafter) to modernize their printing press. The loan was sanctioned in the year 1979 against mortgage of landed property etc. The mortgage deed was executed on 28-5-79. The respondents/writ petitioners failed to make repayment to of the loan as per the terms and conditions. When the arrear of installment and interest tax reached to the tune of nearly Rs. 52 lakhs, the appellant resorted to Section 29 of the said State Financial Corporation Act, 1951 ('SFC Act' in short) to realize the loan amount by issuing a notice on 28-6-1999. Prior to this action the AFC had issued a demand notice to the respondents on 5-11-96 reminding them that if the loan is not redeemed within 15 days recourse to Section 29 of the SFC Act would be taken. Immediately the AFC took over the possession of the mortgage property on 9-2-2000 an...
Ranjit Bhattacharjee Vs. State of Tripura and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Nov-22-2006
Hrishikesh Roy, J.1. In the two writ petitions which are being disposed of by the present judgment, three writ petitioners who are working as physical instructors of Government colleges in the State of Tripura have claimed salaries at par with the lecturers working in such colleges in the State. There is no material difference in the claim in the two cases except in one factual aspect that is on the mode of entry into service in the college. In Civil Rule No. 135 of 1996, the sole petitioner Mr. Ranjit Bhattacharjee was initially appointed as an Assistant Teacher in school and was thereafter, posted as physical instructor in Bir Bikram Evening College. Whereas in the Civil Rule No. 357 of 1996, the two petitioners therein were directly appointed in Ram Thakur College and Belonia College, respectively at a stage when the said colleges were private colleges and were not taken over by the Government. Since common issues have been raised and argued on behalf of the writ petitioners by a c...
Dr. Parimal Chakraborty and Etc. Vs. Smt. Bijaya Paul and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Nov-22-2006
R.B. Misra, J.1. These two appeals have been preferred against the judgment and order dated 23-7-2001 of the learned single Judge of this Court passed in W.P. (C) No. 41 of 1999. Therefore, these two appeals are being disposed of by a common judgment & order.2. By the. impugned order dated 23-7-2001, the learned single Judge while entertaining the Writ Petition (Civil) No. 41 of 1999 filed by Smt. Bijaya Paul regarding claim of compensation in reference to the death of her husband on the allegation of negligence in medical treatment in G. B. Hospital, Agartala, has awarded a compensation of Rs. 1,00,000/- to the writ petitioner with a direction to recover the said amount from the erring doctors, namely Dr. Dhruba Kishore Paul and Dr. Parimal Chakraborty of Kakraban Primary Health Centre after making a formal enquiry. Apart from that medical department was expected to initiate sepa-rate disciplinary proceeding against the above two doctors for commission of gross misconduct in attendin...
Abdul Gaffar Vs. State of Manipur and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Nov-22-2006
U.B. Saha, J.1. The petitioner by filing the present writ petition prayed, inter alia, for issuance of a writ of certiorari for quashing and setting aside the impugned order dated 28.01.03 issued by the Director of Horticulture & Soil Conservation, Manipur wherein and whereunder, the petitioner's engagement, as Muster Roll Peon, was discontinued with immediate effect coupled with prayer for a direction to the respondents to release the daily wages of the petitioner withheld by them, i.e. State respondents and also for a direction to reconsider the case of the petitioner for re-engagement as Muster Roll Peon.2. Heard Mr. HS Paonam, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr. N. Ibotombi, learned State counsel for the respondents.Brief facts, in a nutshell, necessary for disposal of this case are recapitulated as under:The present petitioner was engaged in various farm and progeny orchard cum nurseries as daily wage for production of various kinds of fruit plants etc. to meet departmenta...
Noel Prakash Vs. State of Arunachal Pradesh and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Nov-22-2006
H.N. Sarma, J.1. Common questions of law on the basis of almost similar facts, as projected in this batch of writ petitions, having arisen for determination and adjudication on the prayer of the learned Counsel for the parties, all the writ petitions are heard analogously and disposed of by this common judgment.2. WP(C) No. 298 (AP) 2005, WP(C) No. 257 (AP) 2005 and WP(C) No. 9 (AP) 2005, have been filed challenging the seniority of the respondent No. 4, Sri M. Ngomdir to the cadre of Executive Engineer and the relaxation given to him by the respondent authority relaxing his qualifying period of service that are necessary for the purpose of promotion to the next higher grade counting his ad hoc period of service as Assistant Engineer. The petitioner has also challenged the subsequent promotion of the respondent No. 4 to the rank of Superintending Engineer dated 1.12.2003 and his regularization with effect from 14.3.97 as Executive Engineer issued vide order dated 23.10.2003.In WP(C) N...
Assam State Warehousing Corporation Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax and ...
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Nov-22-2006
D. Biswas, J.1. This appeal under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 was admitted for hearing on June 20, 2003, on the following question of law:Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in view of Section 271B read with Section 275 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the learned Tribunal had erred in law in holding that penalty proceeding under Section 271B can be initiated after completion of the assessment proceedings?2. The appellant is an authority within the meaning of Section 10(29) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and its business activities are restricted by Section 34 of the Warehousing Corporations Act, 1962. The Corporation filed its return of income for the assessment year 1988-89 on August 30, 1988, showing a loss of Rs. 5,38,710. The Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax (Assessment), Special Range II, Guwahati, accepted the return of income and passed the assessment order under Section 143(1) determining the total loss at Rs. 5,38,710 and closed the proceed...
Bharat Drug Stores Vs. Cit and anr.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Nov-22-2006
Mutum B.K. Singh, J.1. In this appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the appellant assailed the orders dated 26-5-2003,and 31-3-2004, passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in I. T. A. No. 481 (Gau) of 1997 for the assessment year 1991-92 of the appellant.2. For better appreciation, the facts, in brief, are that the appellant filed return for the assessment year 1991-92 showing the total income of Rs. 51,790. The assessing officer, on the basis of some documents recovered during the search of the assessee's premises, added a sum of Rs. 1,02,598 as additional income for the relevant assessment year. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the order of the assessing officer, the assessee challenged the assessment order in Appeal No. 158 of 1994-95 before the Commissioner (Appeals). The Commissioner (Appeals) set aside the assessment order with a direction to make fresh assessment. Accordingly, the assessing officer reassessed vide order dated 10-2-1997, by a...
J. Deep Chemicals and Fertilizers Vs. State of Tripura and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Nov-22-2006
R.B. Misra, J.1. The present writ appeal has been preferred against the order dated 13.06.2001 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C) No. 34 of 2001 indicating that the writ petition is not maintainable as the writ petitioner's remedy was provided in the agreement itself for which the writ petitioner might refer the dispute to the arbitrator in accordance with the provision of the agreement.2. The writ petitioner, M/s. J. Deep Chemicals and Fertilizers preferred the writ petition No. 34 of 2001 with a prayer for issuance of writ of mandamus or other directions to the Director as well as the Deputy Director of Agriculture, Government of Tripura to make payments of the outstanding dues of the writ petitioner along with 20% interest from the date of supply of the materials. It appears that the writ petitioner has been dealing in agriculture products, chemicals, fertilizers, manures and pesticides. Pursuant to the Notice Inviting Tender (for short 'NIT') floated by the State-respon...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Doom Dooma India Ltd.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Nov-22-2006
Mutum BK. Singh, J.1. These appeals are directed under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, against the order dated 6.8.2003 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Gauhati Bench, Guwahati relating to the income of the respondent, assessee for the assessment years 1988-89 to 1991-92. These batch of appeals are taken up together for disposal by this common judgment as same substantial question of law is involved in all the cases.2. The facts essential for disposal of these appeals are, in brief, that the respondent is a company carrying on the business of growing and manufacturing of tea and a regular taxpayer. The respondent filed returns for every assessment year mentioned above but the Income-tax Officer refused to accept the taxable income shown by the assessee. The Income-tax Officer assessed the income of the respondent higher than the total income reflected in the returns. Being dissatisfied by the assessment order of the ITO, the respondent took the matter before the ...
Amines and Plasticizers Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax (As ...
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Nov-21-2006
D. Biswas, J.1. This appeal under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 directed against the Judgment and Order dated 8.10.2002 passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Guwahati Bench, Guwahati in ITA No. 229 (Gau.) of 1998 was admitted for hearing on the following questions of law:1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the provisions of Section 115J(1A) of the Act, the learned Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in holding that the provision for the doubtful debts has to be added back to the profits for the purpose of determination of the book profit under Section 115J of the Act ?2. Whether Section 115J is overriding in nature and other provisions of the Act have no bearing in computing the taxable book profit under the said section ?3. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case the provision for doubtful debts will not amount to diminishing in the value of the assets, i.e., the Sundry Debtors and whether the same has to be added ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »