Guwahati Court June 2009 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.
Pancharatna Cement P. Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jun-30-2009
Reported in: (2009)227CTR(Gau)267,[2009]317ITR259(Gauhati)
Amitava Roy, J.1. By the challenge laid in the instant proceeding, the petitioner seeks to abrogate the process of reassessment sought to be initiated by the impugned notice dated September 13, 2007, issued by the Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle, Jorhat, under Section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and the steps consequential thereto. By order dated August 29, 2008, this Court while issuing notice had, in the interim, interdicted the exercise proposed.2. I have heard Mr. G.N. Sahewalla, senior advocate assisted by Mr. D. Senapati, advocate for the petitioner and Mr. U. Bhuyan, learned Counsel for the Revenue.3. The relevant facts providing the background as well as the rival pleadings have to be essentially noted to better comprehend the arguments advanced. The petitioner has presented itself to be a private limited company registered under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956, with its registered office at Purana Titabar in the district of Jorhat, Assam. It is engaged...
Subash Deb Vs. State of Tripura
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jun-26-2009
Reported in: 2009CriLJ3868
Mutum B.K. Singh, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 11-10-01 passed by the Assistant Sessions Judge, South Tripura, Udaipur in Case No. S. T. 141 (ST/ S) 2000, convicting the appellant herein under Sections 458, 325, 307 and 436 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to suffer consecutive rigorous imprisonment for two years, two years, five years and one year respectively.2. Heard Mr. P. K. Biswas, learned Counsel appearing for the appellant and also heard Mr. R. C. Debnath, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor for the respondent.3. The prosecution case is that on 17-10-1999 at about 8:30 p.m., one Sridam Ch. Das lodged a written report to the Darugababu of Sabroom PS to the effect that on the same day at about 7:30 p.m., while the informant was at Sabroom town with his elder son, one Tapan Debnath of Kathalshari bazar informed him that the informant's house has been set on the fire. On getting the said information, the informant with his elder son rushed to his h...
Smt. Tijender Kaur Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax and anr.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jun-24-2009
Reported in: (2009)227CTR(Gau)586,[2009]317ITR455(Gauhati)
Ranjan Gogoi, J.1. Heard Mr. S. Chetia, learned Counsel appearing for the appellant and Mr. U. Bhuyan, learned standing counsel, Income-tax Department.2. This appeal by the assessee is against an order dated August 30, 2006, passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Guwahati Bench, Guwahati, in I. T. A. No. 108 (Gau) of 2006 interfering with the order dated March 17, 2005, passed by the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). By the aforesaid order, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) has interfered with the assessment of the appellant-assessee for the assessment year 2001-02 made under the provisions of Section 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961.3. The detail of facts need not detain the court, save and except that the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) had interfered with the assessment under Section 144 on satisfaction that proof of service of notice on the assessee was not forthcoming and, that apart, the proprietor of the assessee-firm having died, the legal heirs w...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Bimal Auto Agency
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jun-23-2009
Reported in: (2009)226CTR(Gau)573,[2009]314ITR191(Gauhati)
Ranjan Gogoi, J.1. Out of the several substantial questions of law framed at the time of admission of this appeal, two questions have been urged by the appellant at the hearing. The first relates to the addition of Rs. 40,04,369 made by the Assessing Officer in a block assessment order dated November 21/2000, under Section 158BC and Section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act. The block period covered the assessment years 1989-90 to 1999-2000. The said addition having been deleted by the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and the said order having been affirmed by the learned Tribunal by the impugned order dated July 18, 2006, the instant appeal has been filed under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'.2. The second issue pressed at the hearing relates to another addition made by the Assessing Officer in respect of a sum of Rs. 14,98,282 on account of disallowable travelling expenses incurred through credit cards recovered in the course of s...
Shallang Area Coal Dealer and Truck Owner Association and Etc. Vs. Sta ...
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jun-23-2009
Reported in: AIR2010Gau11
J. Chelameswar, C.J.1. A batch of writ petitions and writ appeals are pending for quite some time in this Court. The earliest of the batch, as can be traced out so far, is WP (C) No. 2275/2004. The said batch and connected appeals, as a matter of fact, are heard in part. Broadly speaking, the complaint in those cases is that a truck carrying cargo in the State of Meghalaya is being compelled to pay substantial amounts at innumerable points in the State of Meghalaya to various persons. Broadly such persons fall under four categories - (1) persons operating weighbridges on various terms and conditions stipulated by the State of Meghalaya; (2) the local tribal chiefs known as Syiems and Sardars; (3 the authorities purportedly implementing the provisions of the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 and (4) the police officers of the State of Meghalaya.2. It can be mentioned here that Sylems and Sardars, the local tribal chiefs, who are parties respondents to the various writ ...
Mridul Kumar Bhattacharjee and ors. Vs. State of Assam and anr.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jun-18-2009
Reported in: (2010)ILLJ211Gau
H.N. Sarma, J. 1. Feeling aggrieved by the order dated January 1, 2007 passed by the learned CJM, Kamrup, directing to issue summons upon the petitioners in Complaint Case No. 7624/2007 taking cognizance of the offence under the provisions of the Plantation Labour Act, 1951, and the Rules made thereunder and the continuance of the proceeding, the petitioners have filed this petition praying for quashing of the said proceeding.2. I have heard Mr. S. Ali, learned Counsel for the petitioners and Mr B.B. Gogoi, learned APP, Assam as well as Mr. S. Das, learned Counsel for the respondent No. 2.3. The petitioners herein are Managing Director and Directors of MKB Asia Pvt. Ltd., a company registered under the Indian Companies Act, 1956, having its registered office at 51, Zoo-Narengi Road. The petitioner No. 1 is the Managing Director and the petitioner Nos. 2 and 3 are Directors of the said company. The said company, amongst others, owns, runs and manages the Rani Tea Estates. The aforesaid ...
Mithun Hagjer Alias Action Dimasa Vs. State of Assam and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jun-12-2009
Reported in: 2009CriLJ4370
I.A. Ansari, J.1. Is it not legally permissible for a Court, which has granted bail to an accused, in a non-bailable offence, to cancel bail unless the accused is shown to have violated any of the conditions for bail already granted to him and, if so, is it not possible, in law, to cancel bail by a Court, which granted bail to an accused in a non-bailable offence, if the accused was not already released, despite having been granted bail, for reasons beyond the control of the Court, and, in the meanwhile, charge-sheet is submitted by the investigating agency expressing apprehension that if the accused is released on bail, there is likelihood of the accused absconding and/or that the accused would not be available for trial and the Court, which had granted bail, considers such an apprehension reasonable? When a person, accused of an offence, while seeking bail, or while challenging an order of cancellation of bail, in the High Court, makes false statements or suppresses material facts, w...
Jyotish Das and anr. Vs. State of Tripura
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jun-12-2009
Reported in: 2009CriLJ3553
C.R. Sarma, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 14-11-2003 passed by the learned Asstt. Sessions Judge, South Tripura. By the impugned judgment aforesaid the accused-appellants were convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years under Sections 364/34 of Indian Penal Code (hereinafter called IPC).2. The prosecution case, in brief, may be stated as follows:Smt. Shakti Deb, daughter of the informant, was living in the house of the informant along with her minor daughter Smt. Silpi Deb. Sri Jyotish Das i.e. the appellant No. 1 who used to reside along with his wife Smt. Dipali Das i.e. the appellant No. 2 near the house of the informant, maintained illicit relation with Smt. Shakti Deb. According to the informant, on 14-3-2002 Smt. Shakti Deb had gone to Agartala to visit a Doctor in connection with her headache and she was not traceable since then. The prosecution story further reveals that, the appellant Jyotish Das had taken away Smt....
Alindra Debbarma and Etc. Etc. Vs. State of Tripura
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jun-12-2009
Reported in: 2009CriLJ3917
P.K. Musahary, J.1. By a common judgment and order dated 17-8-2006 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, West Tripura, Agartala in case No. ST 13(WT)A/2005, the accused namely Sri Dhanu Debbarma, Sri Jitendra Debbarma; Sri Alindra Debbarma and Sri Bimal Debbarma were convicted and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for five (5) years and to pay fine of Rs. 1,000/-each, and in default of payment of fine to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for three (3) months under Section 366A read with Section 34, I.' P.C. while the accused Sri Suraj Debbarama was acquitted of charge under Section 366A, I.P.C. but was convicted and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for five (5) years and to pay fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default of payment of fine to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for three (3) months under Section 366 read with Section 34, I.P.C. He was further sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and to pay fine of Rs. 5,000/-, in default of payment of fine to...
Marion Begum and Etc. Vs. State of Assam and ors. Etc.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jun-12-2009
Reported in: AIR2010Gau37
J. Chelameswar, C.J.1. These writ petitions raise a common question of law regarding the constitutional validity of Section 15 of the Assam Panchayat Act. The petitioners in these various writ petitions are the Presidents of the Village Panchayats within the State of Assam and apprehend that they might be removed from the office of the Village Panchayats by virtue of a no confidence motion. Hence these writ petitions challenging the constitutional validity of Section 15 of the Assam Panchayat Act which provides for removal of either the President or the Vice President of the Village Panchayat through the process of no confidence motion.2. In essence, the submission of the petitioners is that under the constitutional scheme President and the Vice President of the Village Panchayats are required to be elected directly by the entire electorate of the village whereas under Section 15 the President and Vice Presidents of a Village Panchayat are made removable by the process of no confidence...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »