Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Guwahati
Reported in : (1991)37ITD392(Gau.)
1. This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) by which he has confirmed the order passed by the Assessing officer giving effect to the order and directions passed under Section 263 of the Income-tax Act 1961 by the Commissioner of Income-tax.2. It may be mentioned here that against the order passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax under Section 263, the assessee took up the matter in appeal before the Appellate Tribunal and the Tribunal by its order dated 29-8-1988 in ITA No. 214(Gau)/86 held that the Commissioner of Income-tax had jurisdiction to exercise his powers under Section 263 on the facts of the case.3. Thereafter, the Assessing Officer pursuant to the directions of the Commissioner of Income-tax under Section 263 completed the assessment under Section 143(3) read with Section 263 which was taken by the assessee in appeal before the present CIT(A) whose order is the subject-matter of the present appeal before us.4. T...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Guwahati
A. Raghuvir, C.J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal at Gauhati, at the instance of the assessee (S. P. Malik), referred the following question for the opinion of this court : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in consideration of the provisions of Sections 143(3), 148, 153(1)(a)(iii), 153(2)(a) and 153(1)(b), the Tribunal was right in holding that the assessment was not barred by limitation and, therefore, holding it to be valid ?' 2. The assessee seeks an answer to the question separately for the assessment year 1970-71 and the assessment year 1971-72 on the facts of the respective years.3. The assessee submitted a return on September 30, 1970, and the same return again on December 19, 1972, for the assessment year 1970-71. On both the occasions, the income shown was Rs. 11,973. On May 19, 1972, he filed a return for the assessment year 1971-72 showing income of Rs. 23,809.4. The Income-tax Officer informed the assessee that the income of Rs. 3,84,115 ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Guwahati
A. Raghuvir, C.J. 1. The subject-matter in this group of cases is the tariff imposed on consumption of electricity in Assam. The generation and supply of electricity in the State is regulated by two Central enactments -- one is called the Indian Electricity Act 9 of 1910 and the other is the Indian Electricity (Supply) Act 54 of 1948. There is also one State enactment called The Assam Electricity Duty Act, 1964 which covers the tariff. In all the States of India Electricity Boards are Constituted under Section 5 of the Act 34 of 1948. The Board in Assam is called the Assam State Electricity Board (the Board) With a Chairman as its administrative head. The Board in Assam has the capacity togenerate 500 MW but as on today generates only 220 MW in six Units but there are some Units out of the six are sick Units. The Kathalguri Unit generates energy by natural gas, Chandrapur, Galeky, Bongaigaon, Namrup, Lakwa Units generate energy by coal. 2. The demand for energy in Assam is 350 MW. Th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Guwahati
B.P. Saraf, J.1. By this reference made under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Gauhati Bench, Gauhati, has referred the following question of law for our opinion : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and having regard to the provision of Section 2(23) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the share income of the assessee's wife from Mannalal Jhabarmal is not includible in the hands of the assessee individual under Section 64(iii) ?'2. There appears to be some mistake in the question as, in view of the facts of the case, the relevant section should be Section 64(1)(i) and not Section 64(iii), We shall, therefore, read Section 64(1)(i) in place of Section 64(iii).3. The facts of the case may be briefly stated as follows. There was a partnership firm named Mannalal Jhabarmal. In the said firm, while the assessee, Jhabarmal Agarwalla, was a partner in a representative capacity as karta...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Guwahati
A. Raghuvir, C.J. 1. This reference is made under the Income-tax Act, 1961, at the instance of the assessee, a tea company called Sonai River Tea Company Ltd. The assessee for the assessment year 1975-76 returned an income of Rs. 72,288. The Income-tax Officer, after inquiry, varied the amount and held that the income was Rs. 3,05,735. The assessee successfully appealed. The assessment order was set aside. The Income-tax Officer was ordered to reframe the order. The assessee filed a further appeal against the order of remand as the assessee sought annulment of the Income-tax Officer's order. The Tribunal followed a decision in I.T.A. No. 211(Gauhati) of 1976-77 relating to Mahatta Construction Company, Tezpur, and dismissed the appeal. Thereupon, the following four questions are referred to this court at the instance of the assessee. The questions read as under : '1. Whether the provisions of Section 144B of the Income-tax Act, 1961, are procedural or substantive ? 2. Even if it be c...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Guwahati
A. Raghuvir, C.J. 1. The State Government of Assam on July 7, 1989 promulgated Rules for Admission to the 356 seats of First Year M.B.B.S. and B.D.S. Courses at Dibrugarh, Gauhati and at Silchar Medical Colleges. The earlier Rules of 1974 were repealed and applications were invited to be filed on or before July 25, 1989 which was later extended to August 4, 1989. In the promulgated new Rules ten seats are reserved for Meghalaya, Mizoram one, Arunachal Pradesh one, Nagaland one and in the balance of 343 seats reservations are specified for Scheduled Castes 7%, Scheduled Tribe (Plains) 10%, Scheduled Tribes (Hills) 5%, sons and daughters dependent of Ex-servicemen and serving brother, sister defence personnel from Assam -- 3 seats, sons and daughters dependent brother or sister and grandson or grand-daughter of freedom fighters of the State -- 2 seats, sons and daughters, brothers and sisters of the martyers of Assam Movement -- 2 seats, children of tea garden and ex-tea garden communit...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Guwahati
B.L. Hansaria, J. 1. The petitioner is an income-tax assessee. Its assessment for the year 1977-78 was completed on March 22, 1979, under Section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act'), and a sum of Rs. 813 was found refundable on account of excess payment of advance tax. A rectification proceeding was subsequently initiated. This was relatable to the loss of the previous year which was not set off. The assessment was accordingly modified and a sum of Rs. 35,696 became refundable. The petitioner claimed interest up to the date of rectification which was January 5, 1981, This was disallowed. A revision was, thereafter, preferred before the Commissioner of Income-tax who also refused to pay interest up to the date of rectification. Feeling aggrieved, this petition has been filed by the assessee. 2. The question for determination is whether interest in a case of the present nature was payable till the date of rectification or the entitlement of the assessee to receive i...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Guwahati
B.P. Saraf, J.1. In this batch of petitions the petitioners have challenged the validity of Section 26A of the Tripura Sales Tax Act, 1976, on the ground of violation of the provisions of Articles 14 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution. As the facts of all the cases are identical, the facts of one of the cases, namely, Civil Rule No. 48 of 1984 are set out below.The petitioner in Civil Rule No. 48 of 1984, is a partnership firm carrying on the business of manufacture and sale of bricks, etc., and is registered as a dealer under the Tripura Sales Tax Act, 1976, hereinafter 'the Act'. The petitioner was assessed by the Superintendent of Taxes, Dharmanagar, under Section 9(4) of the Act for the period ending 1982-83 and a sum of Rs. 19,687.50 was determined as the amount due on account of tax and interest after allowing deduction for the amount of Rs. 5,000 paid by the petitioner. In pursuance of the aforesaid order of assessment, a notice of demand was issued directing the petitioner to pa...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Guwahati
B.P. Saraf, J.1. The question that arises for determination in this writ petition is whether 'pea-gravels' supplied by the petitioner falls within the category of goods described as 'metals, stone chips, any other products or sub-products arising out of bricks or stones' specified in item 29 of the Schedule of taxable goods attached to the Tripura Sales Tax Act, 1976.2. The petitioner, a Government contractor, is a dealer registered under the Tripura Sales Tax Act, 1976, hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'. During the relevant period the petitioner supplied pea-gravels to the Executive Engineer, Public Health Engineering Division No. (III), Udaipur, South Tripura, in pursuance of a work order issued by him. The petitioner submitted his returns of turnover under the Act for the relevant periods to the Superintendent of Taxes, Agartala, showing tax due as 'nil' on the ground that pea-gravels supplied by him did not fall in any of the taxable items described in the Schedule of taxable g...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Guwahati
A. Raghuvir, C.J. 1. This reference is made under Sub-section (1) of Section 256 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, at the instance of the assessee, a tea company with the name Doom Dooma Tea Company Ltd. The reference relates to the assessment year 1975-76. The tea estate paid Rs. 2,26,280 under the Companies (Profits) Surtax Act VII of 1964, and unsuccessfully claimed deduction before the revenue authorities. The Income-tax Officer rejected the claim as prohibited under Section 40(a)(ii) of the Income-tax Act. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner, on appeal, entertained a doubt as to the tenability of such a claim, and, therefore, confirmed the order under appeal. The Tribunal dismissed the further appeal following a decision of the Bombay Bench of the Appellate Tribunal in I.T.A. No. 3643 (Bom) of 1974-75 dated December 1, 1977. Finally, at the instance of the tea estate, the following question is referred to this court : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the...
Tag this Judgment!