Court : Guwahati
N.S. Singh, J.1. Upon hearing learned counsel on both the sides, it appears to me that the writ petitioner, namely, Jagneswar Dey and Bibhash Ranjan Dey, P. O. Haflong, District : N. C. Hills, made a prayer in this writ petition for a direction to respondent No. 1, namely, the Income-tax Officer, A Ward, Silchar, Cachar, Assam, to cancel, withdraw or forbear from giving effect to the impugned notice/order dated March 4, 1992, as in annexure-I to the writ petition and to quash the entire proceedings made under Section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, by contending, inter alia, that the petitioner-firm is a dealer of petrol, diesel, super kerosene oil and lubricants and the same are supplied by the Indian Oil Corporation, Digboi, from its various depots ; and that the firm has been assessed to income-tax under Section 143 since the assessment years 1973-74 to 1987-88 as per the provisions of law laid down under Section 143 which was in force till its amendment came into force on and fr...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Guwahati
Hansaria, J. 1. Forests are part of our national wealth. Their contributions are varied. They not only provide fuel and other inputs for various industrial and commercial activities but serve some other needs of human society also. They contribute in a significant way to preserve the ecological balance whose growing importance is being realised day by day. The contribution of forests and trees in preventing soil erosion and flood is well-known. The flora and fauna of a country are largely dependent upon them. They shelter and protect agriculture and influence local climatic extremes. They ensure clear water supply and prevent pollution. They are essential components of attractive landscapes and are becoming important for urban population of industrial countries as a source of recreational facilities. But when there is a rapid growth of population the forests become easy victim as the growth in population demands more land for settlement. Even so, a balance has to be struck between th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Guwahati
B.L. Hansaria, J. 1. A plot of land measuring 2 (two) bighas covered by dag No. 331 of Patta No. 55 of Barunguri Kisamat, Mouza-Jiria, in the district of Nowgong is the subject matter of the present proceeding. The land, admittedly, initially belonged to the plaintiff Gunaram Kalita. Being in dire need of money,he wanted to mortgage the land to Hatem Ali, but Hatem Ali could not advance any money on mortgage; he insisted on sale, which request was complied with as Gunaram must have money to take care of his dire need. Accordingly, a registered sale deed was executed on 14-11-70 and on the same day a registered ekrarnama was gone into covenanting that Hatem would reconvey the land to Gunaram if the consideration, which was fixed at Rs. 1,200/- would be repaid within five years. The plaintiff's case is that he made repeated verbal demands on Hatem to comply with the terms of ekrarnama and issued registered notice also but to no avail. Not only this, to the dismay of the plaintiff he ca...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Guwahati
P.K. Goswami, J. 1. This reference involving two applications, one under Section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 (hereinafter referredto as 'the old Act') and the other under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the new Act'), is made by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, 'A' Bench, Calcutta, in respect of the assessment years 1960-61 and 1961-62. The questions which have been referred to us may be set out: '(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the notices to show cause under Section 33B of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, and Section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the assessment years 1960-61 and 1961-62 were not validly served on the assessee ? (2) If the answer to question No. 1 is in the affirmative, then whether the Tribunal was right in holding that the proceedings under Section 33B of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, and Section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, w...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Guwahati
Bindra, J. 1. The short though somewhat vexing question that falls for determination in this writ petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India by the Assam Financial Corporation, Shillong, hereinafter briefly referred to as the Corporation, is about the exact legal connotation of the expression 'individual' used in Section 3 of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, hereinafter called 'the Act'. 2. The facts that have led to the making of the present petition can be briefly summarised. On January 23, 1968, the Wealth-tax Officer, Ward-A, Shillong, issued a notice under Section 17 of the Act communicating to the Corporation that the net wealth of the Corporation chargeable to tax for the assessment year 1959-60 had escaped assessment and requiring the Corporation to submit its return of wealth within 35 days of the receipt of the notice. That communication led to exchange of correspondence between the wealth-tax authorities and the officials of the Corporation wherein the ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Guwahati
H.K. Sema, J.1. This bail application has been filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for releasing the accused Amulya Bhowmik who has been arrested on 16-3-98 in connection with Bishlgarh P. SECTIONC ase No. 101 of 1997 under Section 302, IPC. Since the arrest on 16-3-98 the accused has been incarcerated for about 103 nays by now. His bail application have been rejected by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, West Tripura, Agartala on 16-6-98 on the ground that mandatory period 180 days has not been lapsed in view of Criminal Procedure Code stands a mended by Tripura Amendment Act of 1998.2. It is contended by Mr. B.B. Deb, learned Counsel for the petitioner that Tripura Amendment Act, 1997 is not applicable to the case of general nature. According to the learned Counsel, reading of aims and objects of that amended Act it extends only to the extremists related offence and as far as offence of the general nature is concerned, the Central Act would be applicable.3....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Guwahati
U.L. Bhat, C.J.1. The common revision petitioner in the two revision petitions has been convicted under Section 16 read with Section 7 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 in two separate cases for having sold adulterated food articles, namely, coriander powder and chillies powder to the Food Inspector and sentenced in each case to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/- and in default to undergo imprisonment for three months. The conviction and sentenced entered against him in each of the cases have been confirmed by the appellate Court in separate appeals. Hence these two revisions.2. Revision petitioner is a trader in Jorhat town. Food Inspector, Jorhat on 28-5-79 visited the shop of the revision petitioner and after observing the legal requirements purchased samples of coriander powder and chillies powder and sent one part of each of the samples to the Public Analyst and the remaining parts of the samples to the Local (Health) Autho...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Guwahati
Amitava Roy, J. 1. This appeal while registering a challenge to the judgment and order dated 27.6.2003 passed by the learned Additional District Magistrate (Judicial), Aizawl, in RFA 5/2003 raises a question of considerable moment relating to the applicability of the Limitation Act, 1963, to the State of Mizoram. By the impugned judgment and order, the learned Appellate Court affirmed the judgment and order of the learned Trial Court dismissing the suit of the appellant/plaintiff amongst others being barred by limitation.2. I have heard Mr. C. Lalramzauva, learned Counsel for the appellant and Mr. N. Sailo, learned Government Advocate for the respondents.3. The pleaded facts are indispensable. The appellant/plaintiff instituted Money Suit No. 50/98 in the Court of the Additional Deputy Commissioner (Judicial), Aizawl, against the respondents praying for a decree, inter alia, for declaring that the respondents/defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay a sum of Rs. 10,12,500 on...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Guwahati
Sarjoo Prosad, C.J. CIVIL REVISION NO. 119 OF 1952 1. The petitioner in this case instituted Money Suit No. 50 of 1949 in the Court of the Additional Subordinate Judge at Dhubri for recovery of a sum of Rs. 2,210/8/-as compensation for loss on account of certain goods booked at Amingaon Railway Station. The Union of India was made, a party defendant to the suit as the owner of tha Assam Railway to which the goods were consigned. 2. The plaintiff's case was that one, Haripada Saha, an employee of the plaintiff who is also a party defendant to the suit, had purchased 125 pairs of 'saris' and 11 pairs of 'dhotis' on behalf of the plaintiff from a Marwar firm at Gauhati for a sum of Rs. 2,073/-. He packed the cloth in gunny bags and booked them at the Amingaoa Railway Station, as per Bill of Lading, Ex. 1. The goods were kept in charge of the Guard of tha train concerned and they were to be delivered to the petitioner at Sapat-gram, but no delivery was made. Thereafter the petitioner se...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Guwahati
G. Mehrotra, C.J.1. These two appeals raise common questions and can be disposed, of by one judgment. Both the appeals are against the accrual passed by the Magistrate, First Class, Silchar.2. Respondent Jamaluddin is the husband Of Musst. Aburunnessa Bibi who is the respondent in the other appeal. Jamaluddin was prosecuted Under Section 14 of the Foreigners Act. The charge against him was that he left India in the year 1950 and returned sometime in 1954 under ,a Pakistan passport. He overstayed in India and thus committed breach of the passport rules. Notice was given to him1 in 1958 by the Deputy Commissioner, Cachar to leave India within sometime specified in the nice. He failed to leave the limits of the Cachar district' within the time specified in the notice. Thereafter he was prosecuted Under Section 14 of the Foreigners Act. The Magistrate has come to the conclusion that on the date when he returned to India in the year 1954 he was not a foreigner within the meaning of the For...
Tag this Judgment!