Guwahati Court May 2013 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.
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. M/S. Meghalaya Steels Ltd. and Another
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: May-29-2013
Judgment and Order: Ansari, J. 1. By this common judgment and order, we propose to dispose of these two appeals, preferred under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), against the orders, dated 19.03.2010, passed by the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as the learned Tribunal), Guwahati, in Income Tax Appeal (in short, ITA) Nos. ITA 52/Gau/2009 and ITA 95/Gau/2007 inasmuch as these two appeals, as would be seen, cover all the four subsidies, namely, transport subsidy, interest subsidy, power subsidy and insurance subsidy, which form the subject-matter of controversy in the present set of appeals. While disposing of the two appeals, as indicated above, the learned Tribunal took the view that the assessee-respondents are entitled to claim deduction either under Section 80IB or under Section 80IC of the Act, though the Revenue contends that the assessee-respondents are not entitled to receive, and could not have been le...
Chitpal Munda Vs. the State of Assam
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: May-27-2013
Judgment and Order, (Oral) B.K. Sharma, J. 1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 17/05/2008 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Jorhat in Sessions Case No. 96(JJ)2005 convicting the accused appellant under Section 302 IPC and sentencing him to undergo imprisonment for life with fine of Rs. 5,000/- and in default RI for 3 (three) months. 2. The prosecution case is that one Dawood Munda and his wife Samari Munda were issueless and accordingly the accused appellant, the son of his brother-in-law was kept in their house as adopted son. On 31.5.2005 when Samari Munda came home at about 11 pm from a rehearsal of a play, she discovered her husband lying in a pool of blood. The accused appellant was found absconding. FIR dated 1.6.2005 was lodged by her, on the basis of which Teok PS case No. 42/2005 was registered under Section 302 IPC. After completion of the investigation, the police submitted charge sheet on the basis of which charge against the accused appellant was fram...
Dasarat Teli Vs. the State of Assam
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: May-23-2013
Judgment and Order, (Oral) B.K. Sharma, J. 1. Heard Ms. B. Bhuyan, learned Amicus Curiae. Also heard Mr. D. Das, learned APP, Assam. We have also perused the entire materials on record. This jail appeal is directed against the judgment dated 11/04/2008 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (FTC), Darrang, Mangaldoi in Sessions Case No. 47(DMFT) 2006. By the said judgment while convicting the accused appellant under Section 458/323/436/302 IPC, he has been sentenced to undergo RI for 2(two) years with fine of Rs. 3000/- and in default to undergo SI for 6 (six) months for the offence committed under Section 458 IPC. As regards his conviction under Section 323 IPC, the sentence is for SI for two months and for the conviction under Section 302 IPC, the sentence is RI for life with fine of Rs. 7,000/- and in default RI for further one year. For the offence under Section 436 IPC, the sentence is RI for 5(five) years with fine of Rs. 5,000/- and in default to undergo RI for another ...
Md. Abdus Samad Vs. State of Assam
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: May-23-2013
Judgment and Order, (Oral) 1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 15.03.2012 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge (FTC), Bongaigaon in Sessions Case No. 13(A)/2010 convicting accused/appellant Abdul Samad under Sections 448/376 IPC and sentencing him to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment (RI) for a period of 7 (seven) years and to pay fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default, to undergo Simple Imprisonment (SI) for a further period of 2 (two) months for the conviction under Section 376 IPC and to undergo RI for 3 (three) months for the conviction under Section 448 IPC, both the sentences to run concurrently. 2. Prosecution case in brief is that on 08.09.2008 at about 6:00 p.m., one Rupbanu Bewa lodged a first information before Kokila Watch Post (WP) under Abhayapuri Police Station alleging that on 05.09.2008 at about 12 midnight, about 8 to 10 persons, armed with deadly weapons had entered into her house by cutting the ropes of the door and forcefully took away her 17 ...
Shyamal Dang Vs. the State of Assam
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: May-23-2013
Katakey, Oral, J. The appellant, who has been convicted for the offence under Section 302 IPC and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 1(one) month, vide judgment of conviction dated 18.11.2008 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Golaghat in Sessions Case No.5/2007, has filed the present appeal challenging the said judgment of conviction. 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 23.08.2006 at about 5.30 P.M. the accused appellant Shri Shyamal Dang killed the deceased at Arengapar Naragaon Stone Crushing Quarry belonging to Bhabesh Deka (PW-1). On the basis of the first information report lodged by the PW-1 Bhabesh Deka, on 23.08.2006, Golaghat P.S. Case No.387/2006 under Section 302 IPC was registered. The police during investigation arrested the accused person and also seized the weapon of assault, namely, the dao. The police also recorded the statement of the persons a...
Hemanta Saharia Vs. the State Bank of India and Others
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: May-16-2013
Oral: 1. This writ petition is directed against the order dated 20/03/2002 (Annexure-IX) by which the petitioner was imposed with the penalty of compulsory retirement from service pursuant to a departmental proceeding. The departmental appeal preferred by him was also dismissed by Annexure-XI order dated 17/03/2003, which is also under challenge in this writ petition. 2. I have heard Mr. S. Bharali, learned counsel for the petitioner. I have also heard Mr. S.S. Sarma, learned senior counsel assisted by Ms. F. Khan, learned counsel representing the respondent Bank. I have also gone through the entire materials on record including the disciplinary proceeding file produced by Mr. Sarma. 3. The petitioner while was serving as Cashier-cum-Clerk in the respondent bank was placed under suspension by order dated 08/11/1997 on the ground of committing certain serious irregularities while was working as Cashier-cum-Clerk in Mangaldoi Branch of the Bank. The order of suspension was followed by th...
Dr. JaIn Video on Wheels Limited, New Delhi Vs. Union of India, Repres ...
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: May-10-2013
The matter pertains to implementation of the Inter Facility Medical Ambulance Services in Assam and the awarding of contract thereof. The writ petition running to 76 pages (inclusive of annexures from page 10 to 76) was filed with the following prayer :- It is therefore most respectfully prayed that Your Lordship would be graciously pleased to admit this petition by issuing Rule calling upon the Respondents to show cause as to why (i) To issue a Writ of Mandamus directing Respondent No.2 to ensure participation of the Petitioner in the opening of financial bid. (ii) To issue a Writ of Certiorari calling for the of RFP No. NRHM/102/IFT/976 dated 03.10.2012 issued by Respondent No.2. (iii) To call for the records of the case and upon perusal of the same and on hearing the parties be pleased to make the Rule absolute and / or be pleased to pass any such further or other order or orders as your lordship may deem fit and proper. (iv) To refrain and restrain the Respondent No.2 from taking a...
Milan Konwar @ Madhu Vs. State of Assam
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: May-08-2013
Judgment and Order (Oral) 1. Heard Mr. A. K. Bhuyan, learned Amicus Curiae for the appellant and Mr. B. J. Dutta, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor, Assam. 2. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 31.08.2009 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Dhemaji in Sessions Case No. 13 (DH)/2009 convicting the appellant under Section 448/354 IPC and sentencing him to undergo simple imprisonment (SI) for 2 (two) months with fine of Rs. 500/-, in default, to undergo further SI for 8 (eight) days for the offence committed under Section 448 IPC and to undergo SI for 6 (six) months with fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default, to undergo further SI for another 15 (fifteen) days for the offence committed under Section 354 IPC, both the sentences to run concurrently. 3. Prosecution case in brief as can be seen from the first information is that on 19.12.2008 at about 7:00 p.m. while the informant was alone in her residence, the accused entered into her house and dragged her out to the cour...
Bharat Chandra Sarkar and Others Vs. the State of Assam (Represented b ...
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: May-08-2013
Judgment and Order 1. Dr. B. Ahmed, the learned Counsel argues for the petitioners. The respondents 1, 2, 4, 5, 6 and 7 are represented by Mr. M.R. Pathak, the Standing Counsel, Education. The respondent No.3 is represented by Mr. B. Gogoi, Standing Counsel, Finance. The private respondents 8 to 132 are un-presented although notices were duly served on them. 2. The petitioners in the WP(C) 2346/2008 are unemployed and are aspiring for appointment to the post of Teacher in L.P/ME Schools, in Bongaigaon district. They challenge the Government circular dated 10.8.2000 issued by the Commissioner and Secretary to the Government of Assam, Education Department, whereby, decision was taken to regularize the services of irregularly appointed teachers. The petitioners specifically challenge the order of the Director of Elementary Education (DEE), Assam, issued on 30.1.2006 and the order dated 22.4.2008 issued by the District Elementary Education Officer (DEEO), Bongaigaon, whereby services of 12...
Londhoni Devi and Others Vs. the State Through National Investigation ...
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: May-07-2013
Judgment and Order, (Oral) Ansari, J. 1. By this common judgment and order, we propose to dispose of all the above mentioned appeals, which have arisen out of the order, dated 06-09-2012, passed, in Special NIA Case No. 01 of 2010, by the learned Special Judge, NIA, Assam, Guwahati, whereby the learned Court below has framed charges under Sections 120B and 121A IPC read with Sections 17, 18, 20 and 21 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967, against the present accused-appellants. 2. Before these appeals could be heard on merit, a preliminary objection has been raised by the respondent herein, namely, National Investigating Agency, the preliminary objection being that these appeals, which have been preferred under Section 21 of the National Investigating Agency Act, 2008 (in short, NIA Act, 2008), is not maintainable in law inasmuch as an order framing charge in a case, which is investigated by the NIA and covered by the provisions of the NIA Act, 2008, is an interlocutory or...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›