Andhra Pradesh Court June 1967 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.
Municipal Council of Vizianagaram Vs. Shah Bibi Saheba
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-22-1967
Reported in: AIR1968AP194
Sambasiva Rao, J. 1. These four second appeals involve one common question and the parties also are the same in all the four second appeals. These second appeals were referred to a Division Bench by N.D. Krishna Rao, J., as the correctness of the view taken by Ekbote J., in S. A. No. 617 of 1962 which was relied on by the learned counsel for the appellant before him and was questioned by the learned counsel for the respondent. The Municipal Council of Vizianagaram, represented by its Commissioner and Executive Authority is the appellant and an assessee in that Municipality is the respondent in all the four second appeals, The second appeals arise out of four suits filed by the appellant in the Court of the District Munsif at Vizianagaram for recovery of certain sums made up of:--(1) house-tax due for certain half-years; (2) Surcharge on the said house-tax; and (3) Library cess and warrant fees. 2. In addition to the other defences the respondent as defendant raised the plea that the d...
Dwaraka Prasad Vs. Controller of Estate Duty, Andhra Pradesh.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-22-1967
Reported in: [1968]67ITR281(AP)
JAGANMOHAN REDDY C.J. - The only question that has been referred to us by the Central Board of Direct Taxes under 64 of the Estate Duty Act is :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, an adoption by a Hindu amounts to a surrender or a voluntary transfer or gift of any part of his property to the adopted son and whether the levy on the petitioners share is legal ?'The deceased was the sole surviving coparcener of a Hindu undivided family, and on March 25, 1954, i.e., about a month before his death, he adopted a son, who is now the person accountable. A claim was made by the accountable person that after his adoption he became a member of the estate duty only in respect of the other half share. The Assistant Controller of Estate Duty, Hyderabad, who was the assessing authority in this case, surrendered in favour of the adopted son, within two years before death, his owner and that liability to estate duty was attracted on the death in respect of the interest thus sur...
Prince Azam Jah Bahadur Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, A.P.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-20-1967
Reported in: [1968]67ITR757(AP)
JAGANMOHAN REDDY C.J. - The Income-tax Tribunal has referred the follwing question for our consideration and opinion, viz. :'Whether, on the factts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee is entitled to exemption of the expenditure of Rs. 10,317 for 1960-61 assessment and Rs. 21,118 for 1961-62 assessment under section 5(j) of the Expenditure-tax Act.'The assessee and his two sons are owners in equal shares of a building called 'Bellevue Palace' in Punjagutta, in respect of which the assessee year 1960-61 and Rs. 31,782 for the assessment year 1961-62. These amounts were spent on behalf of all the three of them, so that the 2/3rds share of both his sons for the year 1960-61 amounted to Rs. 10,317 and Rs. 21,118 for 1961-62. The assessee evidently relinguished his rights to recover those amounts from his sons and voluntarily filed a gift tax return under the Gift-tax Act and had himself assessed thereto and paid the tax. For the years 1960-61 and 1961-62, the assessee claimed...
Commissioner of Income-tax, A.P. Vs. United Constructions, Rajahmundry ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-16-1967
Reported in: [1968]69ITR875(AP)
P. JAGANMOHAN REDDY C.J. - The Tribunal has referred the following question for our decision, viz :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the notice issued under section 34(1)(a) was invalid, being barred by limitation ?'The assessee filed a return for the assessment year 1943-44 for which the corresponding accounting year is the year ended on March 31, 1943. It may be stated that the assessee-firm undertook a contract for the construction of an aerodrome at Madhurpudi, near Rajahmundry, during the second world war, the work having been started in October, 1942, and completed in December, 1943. The accounts of the firm were closed for the whole period from October 1, 1942, to December 31, 1943. The Income-tax Officer issued a notice under section 22(2) on February 19, 1944, calling for a return of income for the assessment year 1943-44. In reply, the assessee stated that the work was started in October, 1942, and completed in December, 1943, and the accounts were ...
Advocate-general, Andhra Pradesh Vs. Vankadaru Laxminarayana Tobacco M ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-13-1967
Reported in: AIR1968AP370
J. Reddy, C.J. 1. These two contempt cases are in respect of a notice issued on behalf of the respondent in Contempt Case No, 6/67 by the two respondents, who arelawyers, in Contempt Case No. 9/67, the contents of which according to the learned Advocate-General have caused and are calculated to cause embarrassment to a judicial officer in the discharge of his duties and also imputed against him an allegation that his conduct was not worthy of a Magistrate. The allegations in the petitions show that the Additional Judicial Second Class Magistrate, Eluru, was trying a criminal case being C. C. No. 2258 of 1965 in which the respondent in Contempt Case No. 6/67, (hereinafter called the 1st respondent), was along with others an accused person. On 14-7-65, the case was taken up for the examination of the accused under Section 242, Cr. P. C. The accused was present in Court, and when he was asked to get into the dock by his advocate, he hesitated to go into the dock but on the advice of the a...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›