Andhra Pradesh Court August 1961 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.
Cocanada Radhaswami Bank Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Andhra P ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-08-1961
Reported in: [1962]46ITR680(AP)
This is a reference by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench, in compliance with the requisition of the High Court of Andhra in Civil Miscellaneous Petitions Nos. 122, 123 and 124 of 1955, dated August 5, 1955. The question of law referred to this court is an follows :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee was entitled to set off the business loss of Rs. 55,912 brought forward from the preceding year against the entire income including interest on securities held by the assessee ?'The relevant facts of the case are briefly as follows :The assessee is the Cocanada Radhaswami Bank Limited at Kakinada. It is a private limited company carrying on banking business with its head office at Kakinada and a branch at Dayalbagh. The assessee receives interest from its investments in Government securities. It also derives loss in some years and profits in some years from its banking business. For the assessment years 1945-46 and 1946-47, the income f...
In Re: Dr. Raghotham
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-05-1961
Reported in: AIR1963AP362; 1963CriLJ253
Jaganmohan Reddy, J. 1. The question that Is referred to us by Sharfuddin Ahmed J. is whether the powers conferred on the Court by Section 94 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to summon witnesses and documents etc. could only be exercised as contemplated under Section 251A after the charge is framed. 2. In order to appreciate this question It is necessary to state a few relevant facts. The petitioner herein was charged for an offence punishable under Section 408 I.P.C. for embezzlement of certain amounts entrusted to him in his capacity as an officer-in-charge of a maternity home, during the course of the enquiry before the IVth City Magistrate, Hyderabad, the petitioner filed an application before turn for summoning certain records from the Court of the District Magistrate, which, according to him, would show trial a prosecution launched on a previous occasion in respect of the very amounts had been withdrawn against him and that as he had been acquitted of the said charge, no charge ...
FakruddIn and ors. Vs. State Police, Nirmal
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-03-1961
Reported in: AIR1962AP236
Munikanniah, J.1. This Revision petition has been referred to a Bench as the question whether an order of discharge purported to be under sub-section (2) of Section 251-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure could be revised by the Session Judge, and whether the Sessions Court can remand the case for 'further enquiry' or there can only be a proceeding by way of a 're-trail'.(2) The facts giving rise to the filing of the present revision petition are quite simple. Thirteen persons have been charge-sheeted by the Station House Officer, Nirmal Police Station, for offences under S. 382 I. P. C. They are accused of committing theft of 10 bags of beedies belonging to Mupkal beedi factory at about 5-00 p.m., on 9-3-1960 after making preparation to cause hurt and wrongful restraint. Those beedi bags were being transported in a jeep car, which was stopped when it neared a jungle and the beedies were stolen by the accused.The Munsif Magistrate, Nirmal, discharged the accused 4 to 13. The reason giv...
Padullaparthi Mutyala Paradeshi Vs. Padullaparthi Subbalakshmi and anr ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-03-1961
Reported in: 1962CriLJ308
Munikanniah, J.1. A question of importance concerning the interpretation of Section 17 of the Hindu Marriage Act (Central Act XXV of 1955) read with Section 494 IPC is involved in this reference which has been made by my learned brother, Basi Reddy, J.2. This revision petition is filed by the petitioner (1st accused) against Criminal Appeal No. 338 of 1959 on the file of the Sessions Judge, Rajahmundry who dismissed it. That appeal arose out of C.C. No. 66 of 1959 on the file of the Additional District Munsif-Magistrate, Ramachandrapuram. As against the 1st accused a private complaint was laid Under Section 494 IPC read with Section 17 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 Central Act XXV of 1955) alleging that this accused, a retired elementray School teacher, contracted a marriage with the 2nd accused, who is the daugther of accused 3 and 4, even though he had at the date the marriage with the 2nd accused the complainant as his wife. The 2nd accuse is the second wife of 1st accused; and ac...
Additional Income-tax Officer, Cuddapah Vs. A. Thimmayya and Another.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-03-1961
Reported in: [1962]46ITR999(AP)
CHANDRA REDDY C.J. - In these appeals against the order of our learned brother, Seshachelapati J., issuing a writ of mandamus directing the appellant to make an apportionment of the tax payable by the Hindu joint family of the respondents as contemplated by section 25A(2) of the Indian Income-tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) the controversy rages round the question as to the consequences that flow from an order under section 25A of the Act recognising a partition as having been effected from an earlier date.In order to appreciate the contentions urged by the respective parties, it is necessary to narrate the material facts briefly. The first respondent in the two appeals and one Venkatanarasu along with their father, Krishnappa, constituted a Hindu undivided family. The family was carrying on business in mining. For the years 1941-42, 1942-43, 1943-44, 1944-45, 1945-46 and 1946-47 the family was assessed to tax. Assessments for the years 1941-42 to 1946-47 were made on 30th...