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
Ram Labhaya, J.1. This is a petition for transfer of a G. R. Case-No. 5/52, pending in the Court of Mr. S. Sarkar Magistrate, 1st Class, Gauhati. Mr. N. C. Bose,. Manager of tile United Jiauk of India is the petitioner beiore us. fie reported to the police that Probodn Dutta Gupta, accused (opposite party) had by fraud and manipulation of accounts committed criminal breach of trust in respect of a sum of Us. 11,816/- belonging to die bank. Alter investigation the accused was chargesiiueted for offences, Under Sections 409 and 477A, Penal Code. The case has dragged on a weakly existence for about two' years.2. The petitioner's case is that he was being,, cross-examined by the Advocate for the defence On 17-7-1953. During the course of the cross-examination, the learned Magistrate addressing the-deieuce counsel said: 'Do not expose him Mr., Choudhury'. The petitioner asserts that the remarks insinuated that he was in complicity with the accused in the commission of the crime, though the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Guwahati
B.P. Katakey, J. 1. This reference is made under Rule 9 of the rules for the Regulation of the Procedure of Officers Appointed to Administer Justice in the Lushai Hills 1937, for confirmation of judgment of conviction passed by the learned Additional District Magistrate (Judicial), Aizawl District, Aizawl in Case No. CRI. Tr. 1604/2001 (Serehip P. S. Case 61/2001) under Section 376(f) of the Indian Penal Code, against the respondent herein and sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 10 years with fine of Rs. 2000/- in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a further period of six months.2. We have heard Mrs. Helen Dawngliani, learned public prosecutor, Mizoram and Mr. C. Lalramzauva, learned Amicus Curiae for the respondent, appointed by the Court.3. The prosecution story in brief is that on 19-8-2001 a written first information report was lodged in Serchhip police station by Rualkhuma, P. W. 1, father of the victim, of Serchhip Chanmari Veng intimating t...
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!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
I.A. Ansari, J.1. This Appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, has arisen out of the award, dated 12.5.2004, passed by the learned Member, MACT, Aizawl, in MAC Case No. 34/2002, directing the present insurer-appellant to pay Rs. 3,12,000 as compensation to the claimant-respondent within one month from the date of the award failing which interest at the rate of 9% per annum would accrue on the awarded amount until full payment is made.2. The material facts, which have led to the present appeal, may be set out as follows:The Claimant-respondent No. 1 instituted the MAC Case No. 34/2003 aforementioned under Section 166 of the MV Act, 1988, claiming compensation for the injuries sustained, his case being, in brief, this : The claimant, aged about 40 years, was, at the relevant point of time, employed as a driver by the respondent No. 2 herein to drive his taxi bearing registration No. MZ01-A-5590 and used to receive Rs. 2,500 as salary per month. On 24.7.2000, when the ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Guwahati
Brij Narain J.C.1. This is an application by Dr. Ram Monohar Lohia and six others for a writ of Habeas Corpus. The petitioners alleged that they were wrongfully and illegally arrested on 11-4-1955 at about 5-30 P. M. in the Tikendrajit Park, Imphal when Dr. Ram Monohar Lohia was delivering a speech on the ground that the holding of public meetings was prohibited by an order on the analogy of Section 144, Criminal P. C, dated 17-12-1954, passed i by the District Magistrate, Manipur, within a radius of two miles from the Court of the District Magistrate, Manipur and this order was subsequently substituted by another order dated 21-12-1954 by which the area was increased to 4 miles and both those orders were proclaimed without being published in the Manipnr Gazette, from police van.On 15-2-1955 the Chief Commissioner, Manipur, published the Notification No. HP/83/54 whereby this order analogus to Section 144, Criminal P. C, was extended for another period of 3 months within, the radius o...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Guwahati
Mehrotra, J. 1. This Rule was issued on an application under Article 226 of the Constitution praying for a writ of certiorari or any other writ of like nature quashing the order passed by the Local Board of Barpeta Sub-division and further for a writ of mandamus directing the Barpeta Local Board not to give effect to its order for payment of license fees fixed by the Local Board, Barpeta, hereinafter called the Board, in respect of Kharma Hat owned by the petitioner. The petitioner states that he is the proprietor of Nisf Khiraj land covered by Patta No. 2 at village Ata, Mouza Bhawanipur in the district of Kamrup. In the year 1936 he opened a Hat on the aforesaid land in order to meet the needs of the neighbouring people. After sometime the Hat was settled by public auction with different people who realised the dues from the persons who carried on their business in the said Hat. The petitioner further states that he had to incur huge expenditure for upkeeping and maintaining the H...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Guwahati
Ram Labhaya, J. 1. This is a petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, from the State of Assam. It arises out of a proceeding under Section 16, Assam Opium Prohibition Act, 1947, as amended. The proceeding was initiated by complaint of the Excise Inspector dated 16-8-1948. The learned Magistrate (first class at Tezpur) found that Judhabir Chetri, Opposite Party was a smuggler of opium by habit and also its seller and stockist and on 21-11-1949 ordered his externment from the Province of Assam for a period of 18 months. 2. An appeal was preferred against this order on 7-12-49. The appeal was allowed and the order of the trial Magistrate was set aside by the learned Additional Sessions Judge L.A.D. 3. The State of Assam has invoked the powers of superintendence that this Court is invested with under Article 227 of the Constitution of India with a view to obtaining a reversal of the appellate, and the restoration of the original order. 4. Mr. Ghose, the learned counsel f...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Guwahati
Lahiri, J.1. Whether the provisions of Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, are applicable in proceedings under Section 27(3) of the W.T. Act, 1957 This absorbing and intriguing question has come up for our consideration in the proceedings which are off-shoots of Civil Rules Nos. 12(M), 36(M) and 37(M) of 1979.2. The Appellate Tribunal refused to state the cases of the assessees under Section 27(1) of the W.T. Act, 1957, for short 'the Act', on the ground that no question of law arose out of the appellate orders. Admittedly beyond 90 days from the date on which the assessees were served with the notices of refusal, they filed applications to this court under Section 27(3) of 'the Act' for requiring the Appellate Tribunal to state the cases to the High Court. In other words, the assessees have made applications under Section 27(3) of ' the Act ' beyond the prescribed period of 90 days and also have filed applications under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, for extension of the ...
Tag this Judgment!