Andhra Pradesh Court February 1965 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.
Prodduturi Veereswara Rao Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Andhra Prade ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-08-1965
Reported in: AIR1966AP20; [1967]63ITR717(AP)
Jaganmohan Reddy, J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following question under section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922:'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the sum of Rs. 9,622 was rightly assessed as profit within the meaning of the proviso to section 10(2)(xi) of the Act?'2. The Assessee is a Hindu undivided family and was being assessed for the year 1958-59 for which the relevant accounting period was from 3-11-1956 to 22-10-1957. The business, in respect of which the assessment was made was money lending business and it appears that an amount of Rs. 52,742 was due to the assessee from one Subhakaran Sriram at the beginning of the assessment year 1957-58. Some further advances were made during that year and the final amount due was Rs. 53,942. As the debtor's financial position became unsatisfactory, he approached for a settlement of his account and by a letter dated 11-10-1956 he offered to transfer to the assessee certain shares...
Tiguti Venkata Peddiraju and anr. Vs. Balireddi Appanna and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-05-1965
Reported in: AIR1966AP80; 1966CriLJ256
ORDERAnantanarayana Ayyar, J.1. This is a revision petition by Tiguti Venkata Peddiraju and another to revise the order of the learned Additional District Mun-sif Magistrate, Kakinada dated 9-11-1964 in Cri. L. M. P. No. 272 of 1964 in M. C. No. 190 of 1961. The order runs as follows:'The respondents 4 and 5 have deposited a sum of Rs. 300 in the court of the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Kakinada. The document dated 20-10-1959 which is a lease agreement in respect of Ac. 20-00 shows that it was agreed to take on lease the Ac. 20-00 for a sum of Rs. 6,000. Hence I direct the respondents 4 and 5 to deposit a sum of Rs. 600 in this Court for the Ac. 2-00 as per the schedule on or before 16-11-1964.'The dispute relates to Acs. 2-00 of land in Up-palanka, hamlet of Gurzarapalli in Kakinada Taluk.2. The claim of the two petitioners is as follows: The first petitioner viz., Tiguti Venkata Peddiraju, purchased an extent of Acs. 6-20 cts. of land in court auction in execution of 0. S. No. 75 of 1...
Yaggina Veeraraghavulu and Mavuleti Somaraju and Co. Vs. Commissioner ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-05-1965
Reported in: [1966]62ITR528(AP)
JAGANMOHAN REDDY, J. - This is a reference consequent upon the directions of this court to the Income-tax Tribunal to refer a case on the following question of law under section 66(2) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 :'Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, there was any basis or material for the department to compute the income at Rs. 60,000 ?'The assessee is an unregistered firm doing the business of rice milling. The assessment is in respect of the year 1956-57 for which the accounting year is the previous year ending on November 20, 1955. On a return being filed under section 22(2) of the Act declaring a net profit of Rs. 26,034, the Income-tax Officer found the turnover to fall short of the turnover which he expected in the business, because according to the gross profit of Rs. 84,999 returned by the assessee, it would be only 4.5% on the turnover. This was considered to be low compared to other rice millers whose gross profits ranged from 8% to 12%; the outturn of...
Muppala Venkata Subbayya Vs. Desiraju Venkata Krishna Sarma
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-02-1965
Reported in: AIR1967AP44
Satyanarayana Raju, C.J.(1) This appeal, under Cl. 15 of the Letters Patent, arises out of a suit filed by the appellant for recovery of a sum of Rs. 5,666-6-6 on the foot of a promissory note, dated the 30th September 1953, executed by the defendant in his favour. The amount sued for represents the original principal of Rs. 4,800 and in interest which accrued thereon. In a short written statement filed by the defendant, he contended that.'the suit pronote was cancelled by the terms of agreement entered into between the plaintiff and the defendant on 20-12-54 and the cause of action has merged in the agreement.'The defendant further pleaded that the plaintiff had no right to sue upon this pronote and if at all, his right was to sue for specific performance of the above contract which was acted upon. There is a further plea that nothing was due upon the suit promissory note. The Subordinate Judge framed two issues which are as follows:1. Whether the novation pleaded by the defendant is ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›