Andhra Pradesh Court February 1970 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.
Kakaraparthy Bhavanarayana Vs. Official Reciever, Krishna and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-27-1970
Reported in: AIR1971AP359
Ramachandra Raju, J.1. This appeal arises out of a suit brought by the appellant against the respondents to enforce an equitable mortgage alleged to have been created by one late Sonti Venkataratnam, the father of respondents 2 to 5. The short point for determination in the appeal is whether Ex. A-7 styled as a letter signed and delivered by Sonti Venkataratanam on 7-11-1951 and relied upon by the appellant as evidencing the creation of the mortgage was compulsarily registrable under Section 17 of the Indian Registration Act and not having been registered was inadmissible in evidence to prove the mortgage. The learned Subordinate Judge who tried the sit held that the document required registration and was therefore inadmissible in evidence and accordingly dismissed the suit. Aggrieved by the said decision of the lower court the plaintiff has preferred this appeal.2. On the pleas taken by the defendants the lower court also framed some more issues and gave findings and the correctness o...
British India Tobacco Corporation Ltd. Vs. the Commissioner of Income ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-27-1970
Reported in: AIR1971AP112; [1971]79ITR41(AP)
Madhava Reddy, J. 1. The following question has been referred under Section 256 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. 'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the sum of Rs.88,000/- paid by the assessee to secure a pension to the Director on his retirement is a permissible deduction in the computation f the asessee's business income?' 2. The assess is a Limited Company incorporated in the United Kingdom and carrying on business in buying and processing tobacco and as commission agents for other non-resident Companies. It has branch for the purchases and processing of tabacco in Runtur in Andhra Pradesh State, It employs large number of Indian Personnel and labour to carry on its business. Shri D.N. Murthy an Indian National took up employment in the Company in 1938 as the resident Manager of the Branch at Guntur on a salary of Rs.500/- and a bonus. in 1949 he became a Director of the Company and was remunerated by a salary and a commission on purchases of tobacco leaf. He was ...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Krishna Mining Co.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-27-1970
Reported in: [1972]83ITR860(AP)
Chinnappa Reddy, J.1. The assesses is a firm carrying on business in mica. In the assessment year 1958-59 the Income-tax Officer noticed that there was a sudden fall in the production of cut mica during the months of September, October and November, for which there was no satisfactory explanation by the assessee. On the basis of the figures for the previous and subsequent months as disclosed by the books of the assessee, the Income-tax Officer came to the conclusion that the production of cut mica was understated and estimated the value of such deficit production at Rs. 1,20,000. The Income-tax Officer also noticed that there were three cash credits on June 11, 1957, June 25, 1957, and August 6, 1957, amounting to Rs. 60,000. The assessee's explanation that these amounts were borrowed from one Arjundas Pokardas was not accepted by the Income-tax Officer. The Income-tax Officer also disallowed a sum of Rs. 1,350 said to have been paid to Arjundas Pokardas by way of interest. He treated ...
Maddi Rama Kotaiah Vs. Maddi Seshamma
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-26-1970
Reported in: AIR1971AP315
ORDER1. The question raised in this revision petition is whether an oral assignment of a promissory note and the grant of a succession certificate based on the recognition of such oral assignment are valid.2. The competing claims in regard to the right under the promissory note are made by the heir at law on the one had and the person who sets up the oral assignment, on the other. The first Additional District Judge, Guntur confirmed the finding of the District Munsif that the oral assignment was proved. He also came to the conclusion that the transfer of an actionable claim under a promissory note need not necessarily be effected by instruments in writing.3. It is urged by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the view of the District Judge is erroneous. Section 46 of the Negotiable Instruments Act enacts, inter alia, that a promissory note payable to bearer is negotiable by the delivery thereof whereas the one that is payable to order is negotiable by the holder by endorsement ...
Kadari Satyanarayana Vs. Gulslapudi Narasimhamurthy
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-24-1970
Reported in: AIR1971AP341
ORDER1. A tenant against whom an order for eviction has been made under Section 10 of the Andhra Pradesh Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction Control) Act 1960, is the petitioner in this revision petition. On his behalf three contentions are urged by Mr. M. Suryanarayana Murty.2. The first contention urged by the learned counsel is that the notification made by the Government under Section 2 Clause (4) of the Act is invalid and is contrary to the terms of the statutory provision. It is submitted that the Rent Controller does not derive anys authority pursuant to the notification which is ultra vires. Clause (4) of Section 2 defines the word 'controller' in these terms:'Controller' means any person not below the rank of a Tahsildar appointed by the Government to perform the functions of a Controller under this Act'.3. It is not contended that a District Munsif is below the rank of a Tahsildar ; nor is it submitted that the notification was not duly made and published. The contention surg...
Chowdhary Punnamchand Hastimal Co. Vs. the Commercial Tax Officer
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-24-1970
Reported in: [1972]29STC694(AP)
Obul Reddi, J. 1. The petitioner has filed this writ petition challenging the notice dated 22nd October, 1969, issued by the Commercial Tax Officer, Cuddapah, proposing to levy a penalty of Rs. 40,725.18 on the petitioner on the ground that the action sought to be taken by the Commercial Tax Officer is barred by limitation inasmuch as the proceedings for penalty were not initiated within a period of four years or six years, as the case may be, from the expiry of the year of assessment. The facts are these :The petitioner-firm submitted its returns for the assessment year 1962-63 disclosing a turnover of Rs. 13,79,666.19 and it was assessed under Section 14(1) of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) on 3rd March, 1964. That assessment was set aside on appeal by an order dated 15th December, 1964, and a fresh best judgment assessment was made on 10th March, 1967. An appeal was preferred against that best judgment assessment and the Assistant Commi...
Merla Sitarama Prasad Vs. Assistant Controller of Estate Duty and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-20-1970
Reported in: [1971]80ITR672(AP)
Venkateswara Rao, J.1. This is a petition under Article 226 of theConstitution of India seeking a writ of prohibition or any other appropriatewrit, direction or order restraining the Assistant Controller of Estate DutyKakinada (R-1), from proceeding with the enquiry in. pursuance of the noticeG.I.R. No. 130 r/7-2-68 issued by him and to pass such other order ororders which the court may deem fit and proper in the circumstancesof the case.2. Merla Ramanna, the father of the petitioner, died on March 31, 1962. On October 1, 1962, the petitioner filed a return with the estate duty authorities declaring the principal value of the estate; at Rs. 1,84,768 on the basts of which a provisional duty of Rs. 18,324.10 was levied. The value of the estate was finally, assessed at Rs. 5,74,992 and duty amounting to Rs. 66,998-40 was imposed on. June 27,1963. After paying this duty in full, the petitioner preferred an appeal to the Appellate Controller who, by his order dated August 10, 1965, granted ...
P.V.G. Raju (Rajah of Vizianagaram) Vs. Commissioner of Expenditure-ta ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-19-1970
Reported in: [1971]79ITR430(AP)
Chinnappa Reddy, J.1. The late Professor Laski thought that'politics' was a science and wrote his famous treatise, A Grammar ofPolitics. Cynics say that ' politics ' is a game played by adventurers. Oneof the questions posed to us in this reference is whether politics can becalled an 'occupation'. Since an 'occupation' is that with which aperson occupies himself, there is no reason why ' politics ' cannot be anoccupation provided it is taken up as a career. An occasional excursioninto the political arena is, of course, not enough. It is true that a profitmotive is absent but then profit motive is not an essential requisite of' occupation '. A person, well endowed with the goods of the world, mayprefer to pursue a profession or occupation without receiving any remuneration for his services. In the present case the facts show that from the year1952 onwards, the assessee, Sri P.V.G. Raju, adopted ' politics ' as acareer and to him, therefore, it was an occupation.2. The further question i...
Commissioner of Income-tax, A. P. Vs. Mandyala Govindu and Co.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-19-1970
Reported in: [1971]82ITR926(AP)
MADHAVA REDDY J. - The following question has been referred to us under section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 :'Whether the assessee is entitled to registration under section 26A of the Income-tax Act, 1922, for the assessment year 1961-62 ?'The question came to be referred in the following circumstances.M/s. Mandyala Govindu & Co., Proddatur, was assessed by the Income-tax Officer, Cuddapah, on February 17, 1962, as a registered firm and the determination of total income and the apportionment thereof between the parties was made accordingly. This assessment order was revised by the Commissioner of Income-tax under section 33B of the Income-tax Act, 1922. Four persons, M. Narayana, M. V. Ramaiah, M. Srinivasulu and M Jaganmohan, a minor, represented by his father and guardian executed a partnership deed on January 5, 1959. The terms of the said partnership, in so far as they are relevant for our present purpose, are as follows :'This deed of partnership executed on the 5th d...
Variety Hall and Ramkrishna Textiles, Atmakur Vs. Commissioner of Inco ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-16-1970
Reported in: AIR1971AP184
Madhava Reddy, J. 1. The following two questions have been refered to us at the instance of the assess-firm arising out of two separate orders of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal Hyderabad in L.T.A. No. 12095/62-63 and I.T.A. No. 12095/62-63 dated 2-26-64;- 'Whether the Appellate Tribunal was justified in reversing the order of the appellate Assistant Commissioner by purporting to follow the decision of the Andhra Pradesh High Court reported in : [1959]35ITR261(AP) . 2. 'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the applicant firm was entitled to registration under S. 26A of the Income Tax Act? The facts and circumstances in which these questions came to be referred may be briefly came to be referred may be firefly stated:- 2. The applicant firm styled 'Variety Hall and Ramakrishna Textiles' carrying on business in retail cloth constituted under an instrument of partnership dated 27-12-1958 applied fro registration for the assessment year 1960-61 under Section 26-A of...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »