Court : Guwahati
Pathak, C. J. (Acting) 1. By these petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have challenged the W/T message dated 22-2-80 issued by the Fishery Department of the Government of Assam with Memo No. VFF. 465/79/134-A dated 22-2-80 under the signature of the Deputy Secretary to the Government of Assam, Fisheries Department directing all Deputy Commissioners and Sub-Divisional Officers not to open the tenders received by them or to make settlement of the fishery without prior clearance from the Government. 2. The facts leading to the present petitions converge on a very narrow compass. The petitioners in both the petitions are members of the Scheduled Caste and belong to Kaivarta family selling fish in the market and dealing in fishery business. The Deputy Commissioner of Dibrugarh issued a notice of sale of fisheries of the Dibrugarh District on 12-2-80 inviting lenders on or before 20-3-80 for settlement of as many as six registered fisheries for the pe...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Guwahati
Saikia, J. 1. This writ application impugns the order dated 5-5-80 passed by the Assam Board of Revenue, in Case No. 7RA(F)/80 admitting the appeal and staying the operation of the order appealed against, namely, the order dated 3-5-80 passed by the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Dibrugarh allowing the petitioner. Dehing Part I Fishery Co-operative Society Ltd. (hereinafter 'the petitioner Society') to operate fishing at Merlegona-Khana Fishery (hereinafter 'the Fishery') until further orders pending settlement of the Fishery by the Government. Tha question required to be decided is whether the appeal is maintainable in the Assam Board of Revenue (hereinafter 'the Board') against an order of interim arrangement in respect of a fishery pending settlement? In other words, whether the Board has jurisdiction to entertain an appeal against an order passed by the Deputy Commissioner making an interim arrangement in respect of a fishery pending settlement? 2. The petitioner society is a F...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Guwahati
Saikia, J. 1. This plaintiff's first appeal is from the judgment and decree dated 12-6-70 and 25-6-70 respectively, of the Assistant District Judge, Nowgong, in Title Suit No. 26 of 1967, partly decreeing the suit against respondent No. 1 and dismissing the suit against respondents Nos, 2 and 3. The facts of the case, in brief, are as follows: The suit land with structures thereon belonged to late Nasiben Nesa who died in Sept., 1964, leaving the defendant No. 1 her only son and heir. During her lifetime the defendant No. 1 leased out the suit property to the plaintiff on rent of Rs. 40/- per month from 23-6-59 till Aug., 1962. On expiry of the lease the plaintiff remained in possession without paying rent since July, 1963. After the death of Nasiben Nesa in Sept., 1964, on 30-12-64 the defendant No. 1 entered into an agreement in writing with the plaintiff to sell the suit property to the plaintiff for Rs. 9,000/-, received Rs. 5,000/- as advance, and agreed to execute the sale dee...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Guwahati
N. Ibotombi Singh, J. 1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has, at theinstance of the assessee, referred under Section 27 of the W,T. Act, 1957 (hereinafter called ' the Act '), the following questions to this court: '(1) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that in the case of the assessee, the calculation of the penalty should be in accordance with Section 18(1)(i) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, as it stood up to March 31, 1965, and then as substituted with effect from April 1, 1965, by Section 18 of the Wealth-tax (Amendment) Act, 1964, and with effect from April 1, 1969, by Section 24 of the Finance Act, 1969, in the view that the default was a continuing one (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in upholding the order of penalty under Section 18(1)(a) passed by the Wealth-tax Officer (3) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and on the basis of the find...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Guwahati
Lahiri, J. 1. ' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was legally correct in refusing to rectify its orders dated May 30, 1974, in I.T.A. No. 709 (Gau) of 1972-73, and dated May 31, 1974, in I.T.A. No. 710 (Gau) of 1972-73, having regard to the provisions of Section 13 of the Direct Taxes (Amendment) Act, 1974, on the ground that it was a debatable point and so no rectification order can be passed under Section 254(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, relating to the assessment! years 1961-62 and 1962-63 '2. The above common question has been referred to the High Court under Section 254(4) of the I.T. Act, 1961, for short ' the Act ' by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Gauhati Bench at Gauhati.3. Relevant facts leading up to the reference may be summarised asfollows :4. For the assessment year 1961-62, the return of income of the assessee was due for submission on July 21, 1961. Similarly for the assessment year 1962-63, return of income was due for sub...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Guwahati
Baharul Islam, Actg. C.J.1. The petitioner was being tried for an offence under Section 302 of the Penal Code. The trial was being held by the Additional Deputy Commissioner, East Khasi Hills, Shillong exercising the powers of the Sessions Judge. The case has a protracted career. Evidence was recorded by five successive Additional Deputy Commissioners before, each in part. Ultimately it came up for hearing argument on 29-6-1978 before Shri P.J. Bazeley, Additional Deputy Commissioner of the aforesaid district. The learned Additional Deputy Commissioner (Shri Bazeley) observed:.Evidence has been completed and recorded by a large number of successive presiding officers of this Court. As such it would not be proper for the Court to appreciate the evidence at this stage. Let there be a de novo trial.Fix 1-8-1978 for evidence and summon all non-official P. Ws. on that date and all official P. Ws. on 3-8-1978...This order has been challenged by this application under Sections 435/439 of th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Guwahati
Baharul Islam, J. 1. These references involve common questions of law; as such this judgment will dispose of all of them.2. As the facts and periods of assessments in Wealth-tax Reference No. 5/75 are more comprehensive, it will be more convenient to refer to the material facts of this reference first.3. The assessment years involved in this reference are from 1963-64 to 1968-69. Admittedly, the assessee was liable to pay wealth-tax for all these years. He was required under Section 14(1) of the W.T. Act', 1957 (hereinafter called 'the Act'), to furnish to the Wealth-tax Officer (hereinafter called 'W.T.O.') a return in the prescribed form. In this case, he did not do so. The W.T.O. issued notices to the assessee under Section 14(2) of the Act and the notices were served on him. He did not comply with the notices. The W.T.O. also issued notices on the assessee under Section 16(4) of the Act. They were also not complied with. In the circumstances, he completed on October 31, 1970, the ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Guwahati
Baharul Islam, J.1. These references involve common questions of law; as such this judgment will dispose of all of them.2. As the facts and periods of assessments in Wealth-tax Reference No. 5/75 are more comprehensive, it will be more convenient to refer to the material facts of this reference first.3. The assessment years involved in this reference are from 1963-64 to 1968-69. Admittedly, the assessee was liable to pay wealth-tax for all these years. He was required under Section 14(1) of the W.T. Act', 1957 (hereinafter called 'the Act'), to furnish to the Wealth-tax Officer (hereinafter called 'W.T.O.') a return in the prescribed form. In this case, he did not do so. The W.T.O. issued notices to the assessee under Section 14(2) of the Act and the notices were served on him. He did not comply with the notices. The W.T.O. also issued notices on the assessee under Section 16(4) of the Act. They were also not complied with. In the circumstances, he completed on October 31, 1970, the as...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Guwahati
BAHARUL ISLAM J. - (8-7-77). These references involve common questions of law; as such this judgment will dispose of all of them.As the facts and periods of assessments in Wealth-tax Reference No. 5/75 are more comprehensive, it will be more convenient to refer to the material facts of this reference first.The assessment years involved in this reference are from 1963-64 to 1968-69. Admittedly, the assessee was liable to pay wealth-tax for all these years. He was required under section 14(1) of the W.T. Act, 1957 (hereinafter called "the Act"), to furnish to the Wealth-tax Officer (hereinafter called "W.T.O.") a return in the prescribed form. In this case, he did not do so. The W.T.O. issued notices to the assessee under section 14(2) of the Act and notices were served on him. He did not comply with the notices. The W.T.O. also issued notices on the assessee under section 16(4) of the Act. They were also not complied with. In the circumstances, he completed on Octob...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Guwahati
Sadanandaswamy, C.J.1. Common questions of law are involved in these three writ petitions under art. 226 of the Constitution. The facts are also similar. In C.R. No. 419/70, the petitioner derived income in the assessment year 1962-63 from two firms, M/s. Ganeshdas Sreeram and M/s. A. V. Morello & Co. The major income was from M/s. Ganeshdas Sreeram which is a registered firm. Respondent No. 1, the ITO, A-Ward, Shillong, assessed the petitioner on the return filed by the petitioner under Section 141 of the I.T. Act, 1961, and found a total income of Rs. 72,102 and demanded an amount of Rs. 36,961.39 as tax including a sum of Rs. 3,881.39 as interest under Section 139. Thereafter, respondent No. 1 made the final assessment under Section 143(3)/154 of the said Act and found the total income of the petitioner to be Rs. 91,174. In pursuance of the said assessment order, respondent No. 1 issued a demand notice dated March 27, 1967, for payment of a sum of Rs. 57,735 as tax for the assessm...
Tag this Judgment!