Andhra Pradesh Court November 1966 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.
Hyderabad Stock Exchange Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, A. P.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-09-1966
Reported in: [1967]66ITR195(AP)
JAGANMOHAN REDDY C.J. - The question that has been referred us by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is as follows :'Whether, on the fact and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee-company was entitled to exemption of the sum of Rs. 8,937 under section 4(3) (i) of the Indian Income-tax Act ?'The assessee is a stock exchange of company, limited by guarantee and registered under section 26 of the Hyderabad Companies Act (Act VI of 1320 F.), which corresponds to section 26 of the Indian Companies Act (Act VII of 1913).The assessment year with reference to which this question has been postulated is 1961-62, for which the accounting year is financial year ending March 31, 1961. The company has been assessed to income-tax from 1952-53 onwards. In all the year up to 1960-61, it filed returns of income showing therein the income from interest on securities and it was accordingly assessed. In connection with its assessments for the years 1953-54, 1954-55, 1955-56 and 1956-57, it made a c...
R. B. Shreeram and Co. (Private) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-09-1966
Reported in: [1968]67ITR428(AP)
JAGANMOHAN REDDY C.J. - Two questions have been referred to us under section 66 (1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, namely :'(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the expenditure of Rs. 28,027 incurred in replacing petrol engines by diesel engines was of a capital nature not allowable under section 10 (2) (xv) of the Act (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that neither initial depreciation nor development rebate was allowable on the cost of the diesel engine ?'The assessee is a private limited company engaged in the business of plying trucks. In the accounting year, it had 23 trucks. In respect of three of these trucks, which were previously running on petrol, the assessee replaced the old petrol engines by new diesel engines which was done at a cost of Rs. 28,027. This expenditure was debited to the profit and ...
Balaji Industries (Bhimavaram) Vs. Special Deputy Collector for Land A ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-07-1966
Reported in: AIR1968AP141
Chandrasekhara Sastry, J.1. In this writ petition the validity of Section 40-B of the Hyderabad Housing Board Act, 1956, as amended by Act 15 of 1962 is questioned.2. Section 40-B reads as follows:--'Payment of compensation:- (1) Notwithstanding anything in the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (Central Act 11 of 1894), the amount payable as compensation in respect of land acquired under this Act shall be an amount equal to twenty times the net average annual income actually derived from such land during the period of five consecutive years immediately preceding of the date of notification under Section 22-A. (2) The net average annual income referred to in Sub-section (1) shall be calculated in the manner and in accordance with the principles set out in the succeeding subsections. (3) The net average annual income shall be one-fifth of the gross rent actual derived by the owner from the land acquired and buildings, if any, thereon, during the period of five consecutive years after deducting ...
The United Tobacco Co. Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise, Hyderabad
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-07-1966
Reported in: AIR1968AP282
Jaganmohan Reddy, C.J.1. This matter was referred to a Full Bench by Chan-dra Reddy, C. J., and Gopalrao Ekbote, J., for reconsideration of the decision in Sita-ramaiah v. Collector of Central Excise, Hyderabad, ILR (1963) Andh Pra 42 delivered by a Bench of this Court, in view of the two decisions of their Lordships of the Supreme Court in State of Bombay v. Supreme General Films Exchange Ltd. : [1960]3SCR640 and Prem Chand v. Excise Commr. U. P., : AIR1963SC996 . In ILR (1963) Andh Pra 42 it was held that Rule 215 of the Rules made under the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, making among other sections Section 189 of the Sea Customs Act applicable to any decision or order relating to any duty or penalty leviable in respect of any goods under the Act or the Rules framed thereunder, was a procedural rule and did not affect the right of appeal conferred under section 35 of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, inasmuch as what section 189 of the Sea Customs Act provides was to regul...
Jowli Sunkiah and Co. Vs. the Commercial Tax Officer and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-07-1966
Reported in: AIR1968AP303; [1968]21STC300(AP)
Krishna Rao, J. 1. This is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for an order in the nature of a writ of Certiorari to call for the records relating to assessment No. G. O 1. 5436/62-63 dated 15-3-1964 made by the Deputy Commercial Tax Officer Nandyal and to quash the same. 2. The petitioner firm is a dealer in groundnuts, seeds, etc. It purchases groundnut and decorticates them into kernel in a factory by taking the same on lease from Messrs. Sri Venkateswara Oil Mills. Dhune and sells the kernel thus decorticated to other Crushing millers. The petitioner submitted its return for the year 1962-63. The Commercial Tax Officer, Nandyal determined the turnover and levied tax on the purchases made by the petitioner of groundunt based on the turnover of kernel supplied to the crushing mills. The petitioner filed the above writ petition for the issue of a wirt of Certiorari to quash the said order of assessment on the ground that groundnut is one of the scheduled good...
Sundermul and Co. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax A. P.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-03-1966
Reported in: [1967]66ITR277(AP)
JAGANMOHAN REDDY C.J. - The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal referred to this court at the instance of the assessee the following question :'Whether, in a best judgment assessment under section 23(4) of the Act (Income-tax Act, 1922), it was open to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner to reduce the estimate of income as fixed by the Income-tax Officer by relying on additional evidence of or material not available to the Income-tax Officer at the time of making the best judgment assessment ?'This question arose on the following facts : The assessee, a registered firm carrying on business as financiers, failed to make a return for the year 1961-62 for which the relevant accounting period was Diwali year commencing from November 1, 1959, and ending on October 20, 1960. A notice under section 22(4) calling for the production of accounts was issued on November 29, 1961, and the date of hearing was fixed as December 13, 1961. On that day the assessee did not appear. A second notice under secti...
Sarojini (R.) Vs. Lakshmana Rao (B.) and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-02-1966
Reported in: (1969)ILLJ9AP
Obul Reddi, J.1. This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the order of the presiding officer, labour court, Guntur, dated 27 November 1963, in Miscellaneous Petition No. 76 of 1963, allowing the claim of respondent 1 (workman) for back-wages for the period from 1 June 1961 to 30 September 1963, The petitioner is the proprietor, Ramakrishna Bus Service, and respondent 1 was a conductor in the transport service of the petitioner. Respondent 1 was dismissed on 27 October 1959, and an industrial dispute was raised and the matter was referred to the labour court, Guntur, and the labour court passed an award on 5 August 1961, reinstating the worker on the ground that the management of the petitioner's bus service did not permit the worker to join service or discharge his duties as a conductor. Pursuant to the award of the labour court, respondent 1 filed an application under Section 33C(2) of the industrial Disputes Act read with Rule 64(2) of th...
V. Sivakamayya Vs. Secretary to Government of India, Department of Com ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-01-1966
Reported in: AIR1968AP283; (1969)IILLJ485AP
ORDER1. The petitioner, a Postal Superintendent filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution for the issue of a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ or direction calling for the records connected with the proceeding No. 3/22/63-SPA dt. 1-1-1965 of the Secretary to Government of India. Department of Communications. (Posts and Telegraph Board). New Delhi, and quash the proceedings.2. The petitioner joined the Postal department as a clerk in Class III Service in 1937 and was promoted to Class II in 1952 and posted as Postal Superintendent. Class II Cadres. In July, 1962 he was promoted to officiate as Senior Superintendent of Post Offices in Class I and posted to Visakhapatnam. In 1963. he was appointed as examiner to value certain answer books pertaining to Savings Bank Incentive Test and after correcting the answer books he returned them to the Deputy Director (Staff) of the Office of the Post Master General, Hyderabad. The valuation of the answer books was...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›