Andhra Pradesh Court July 1968 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.
P.K. Rama Krishna Vs. Special Additional Commercial Tax Officer (Evasi ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-08-1968
Reported in: [1969]24STC549(AP)
Kumarayya, J.1. This is a petition for issuing a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the Special Additional Commercial Tax Officer (Invasions), Vijayawada, to abstain from collecting the tax of Rs. 1,547.80 P. as part of his assessment No. 4720 for the year 1962-63.2. The petitioner is the sole proprietor of the General Hospital Canteen, Guntur. He started the canteen with the permission of the Superintendent of the hospital, in the compound of the General Hospital, which was leased to him on a monthly rent of Rs. 110 subject to various stipulations contained in the order dated 25th November, 1961. He had formally executed an agreement accepting all the conditions. His business consisted in the supply of articles of food and drink in the canteen to the staff and students of the General Hospital, Guntur. The Special Additional Commercial Tax Officer inspected the canteen, recovered some account books and slips showing credit sales from his possession, and after verification, came t...
Public Prosecutor Vs. Pilagala Venkateswara Rao
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-08-1968
Reported in: 1969CriLJ1278
Sharfuddin Ahmed, J.1. The respondent was prosecuted for contravening the provisions of Section 16 (1) and (7) read with Section 2(1)(a) and (1) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act and Rule 44 of the rules framed under the Act. The allegation against him was that on 26-6-65 at about 9 a.m. be was found in possession of a mixture of cow and buffalo milk intended for sale near Power pet, Railway Station, Eluru, P. W. 1, the Food Inspector purchased 3/4 seer of milk for 47 P. and issued a receipt, Ex. P.1. He also served a notice on the accused, copy marked Ex. P-2. Thereafter the milk was divided into three empty clean bottles and after adding 16 drops of formalin, one of the simples was sent for analysis to the Public Analyst. Another bottle was given to the accused and the third sent to the Court. The Public Analyst reported that the sample sent to him contained 53 per cent of extraneous water as calculated from Solids-not. fat and was thereforeadulterated. On that basis a repor...
income-tax Officer, Masulipatnam and anr. Vs. K. Srinivasa Rao
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-05-1968
Reported in: AIR1969AP441
ORDER1. I am constrained to allow this review petition, filed by the Revenue.2. Seshachelapati J.. and I allowed the Writ Petition No. 1126 of 1962 by our order dated 1-2-1968. The Revenue seeks this order to be reviewed. Seshachelapati J.. having retired since rendering our decision, this petition has come up before me sitting singly.3. One Katari Nagabhushanam, the father of the petitioner in the Writ Petition was a partner in a firm. For the assessment year 1948-49 he filed a return showing his taxable income at Rs. 6,000. Later he filed a letter stating that his 1/3 share of the income from the firm for the said assessment year was Rs. 6,402-5-4. The Income-tax Officer by his order dated 19-8-1949 provisionally accepted the share income of the assessee from the firm as stated by him. It thus happened that the individual assessment of the assessee for the year 1948-49 was made prior to 1st April 1952. However, the assessment of the firm of which the assessee was a partner was comple...
Special Tahsildar, Land Acquisition, Srungavarapukota Vs. Thatikonda R ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-03-1968
Reported in: AIR1969AP124
1. This Appeal and Cross and Objections which arise out of land acquisition proceedings, are directed against the order of the learned Subordinate Judge, Visakhapatnam, in O. P. No. 6/63 on his file. Referring Officer is the appellant and the cross objections are preferred by the claimant. 2. Ac. 3-82 cents of the land belonging to the claimant and situated in Pandurti was acquired by Government for construction of a store-yard for the D. B. K. Railway project after due notification. No claim for compensation was made by the claimant before the Land Acquisition Officer in response to the notice issued to him under Section 9 of the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act). After making the necessary enquiry, the Special Tahsildar, Land Acquisition, Srungavarapukota, made his award on 20-12-62 providing for payment of compensation to the claimant at the rate of Rs. 2,310 per acre. He thereafter referred the matter to Court at the instance of the claimant. The learned Sub...
Kishanlal Haricharan Vs. Income-tax Officer, A-ward
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-03-1968
Reported in: [1969]72ITR234(AP)
Basi Reddy, J.1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution for the issue of a writ of certiorari to call for the records relating G. I. No. K. 205/50-51 and quash the rectification order passed on March 16, 1965, by the respondent, namely, the Income-tax Officer, 'A' Ward, Nizamabad, under Section 35(5) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922.2. Two grounds are taken in this writ petition and they are :(1) That inasmuch as the notice under Section 35(5) of the Income-tax Act, 1922, was issued on August 28, 1964, after the Income-tax Act of 1961 came into force, the proceedings under Section 35 of the 1922 Act were not saved by the repealing Section 297 of the 1961 Act, and, consequently, the proceedings under Section 35 of the old Act are void ab initio. (2) That the rectification order made under Section 35 is barred by limitation. 3. At the hearing of this writ petition Mr. P. Rama Rao, the learned advocate for the petitioner, did not press the first point because it is con...
Public Prosecutor Vs. Avvaru Annappa
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-01-1968
Reported in: AIR1969AP278; 1969CriLJ1022
1. This appeal by the State is preferred against the judgment of the Principal District Munsiff Magistrate, Vijayawada in C.C. No. 396 of 1965 acquitting the accused of the charge of being in possession of 11 gold slabs at about 4.20 A.M. on 10-1-1965 on the Vijayawada railway platform, holding that the prosecution has not proved the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. 2. The case for the prosecution is that the accused who got down from the Janata Express proceeding to Madras on Vijayawada Railway platform at 4-20 A.M. on 10-1-1965, was found to be in possession of 11 gold slabs sealed in a cloth belt like a bag tied round his waist under his clothes on being searched by P. W. 1 the Deputy Superintendent of Central Excise, Vijayawada in presence of P. W. 2 the Assistant Station Master, Vijayawada Railway Station. M. Os 2 to 12 are the gold slabs which were seized from the accused under Ex. P-1, the mahazar prepared by P. W. 1 and the same on being tested, were found to be of...
Maturi Umamheswara Rao and ors. Vs. Pendyala Venkatrayudu and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-01-1968
Reported in: [1970]40CompCas751(AP)
It was contended, was a bone fide purchaser for value without notice of the mortgage. The 1st defendant did not undertake to discharge the mortgage liability. He did not sell any of the items of the machinery mortgaged under Ex. A-9 nor realised any substantial sums thereby and that he is not a trustee nor personally liable. He never gave any personal undertaking to discharge the mortgage debt. Some of the mortgaged properties were subject to the first charge in favour of one Chauhan as stated in the deed itself. As the mortgage deed was not registered under the Companies Act the amount thereunder became immediately payable under the provisions there, and the suit is barred by limitation.5. Defendants 2 to 7 were impleaded as parties to the suit on 16-2-1962 by an order on I. A. 786/61. They substantialy adopted the contentions of the 1st defendant and also raised the plea of limitation. It was averred that as per the terms of the mortgage deed executed on 5-6-1948 both the principal a...