Andhra Pradesh Court July 1974 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.
international Foods Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-31-1974
Reported in: 1978(2)ELT50(AP)
Muktadar, J.1. Is wafer a biscuit It has become necessary to give a ruling on this question because the Collector, Central Excise, Hyderabad has levied duty and also penalty on wafers as he was of the opinion that wafers are included in the category of biscuits which were considered to be excisable goods within the meaning of Section 2(d) of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The petitioner is the proprietor of a concern known as Messrs International Foods. The firm is engaged in the manufacture of wafers and cones. The first respondent levied excise duty on the wafers manufactured by the petitioner under the Act.2. It is the case of the petitioner that wafer does not come within the category of biscuits and, therefore, they are not liable for assessment of duty as they are not excisable goods as defined under Section 2(d) of the Act. The petitioner, therefore, prays for a declaration that wafers are. not covered by the expression 'excisable go...
Punuganti Jalpath Rao Vs. the Government of Andhra Pradesh and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-25-1974
Reported in: AIR1975AP105
Chinnappa Reddy, J.1. On 6-12-1966, the right to cut, collect and remove forest produce from Beroon Plot No. 4 in Karimnagar East forest division was sold by public auction by the Divisional Forest Officer. The plaintiff was the highest bidder for Rs. 1,33,500/-. Though according to condition No. 55 of Ex. B-l the Sale Notice generally applicable to auctions of forest produce in forest coupes, plantations and Beroon areas i. e. areas falling outside a reserve forest) the period of lease would be two vears if the auction fetched a price of Rs. 60,000/- or more, according to Ex. B-3 the Special Conditions for Beroon Plots attached to Exhibit B-1, the period of lease was only one year. The signatures of the plaintiff were taken in Exhibits B-l and B-3. Pursuant to condition No. 20 of the sale notice the plaintiff forthwith made Earnest Money Deposit (E. M. D.) of Rs. 10,000/- as soon as the bid was knocked down in his favour. On 19-12-1966, the Chief Conservator of Forests confirmed the a...
Lakshmi Bangle Stores Vs. the Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-24-1974
Reported in: AIR1975AP235
Chinnappa Reddy, J. 1. The plaintiff, a bangle seller of Amadalavalsa purchased glass bangles at Ferozabad under bills Exs. A-9 to A-27 for a sum of Rs. 56,837-04. He booked a wagon for consignment of the bangles from Ferozabad to Srikakulam under RR. No. 434461 and invoice No. 3/3-6-64. The forwarding note was Ex. B-l. On 22-6-1964 there was a collision of trains at Ganguti Station due according to the plaintiff, to the negligence of the railway servants. The wagon carrying the glass bangles was involved in the accident and some of the cases of bangles were broken. Later the bangles were transferred to another wagon by the railway authorities along with other commodities like bags of dhal, etc. The consignment reached Srikakulam on 25-7-1964 and was unloaded on 27-7-1964. The plaintiff took 'open assessment delivery' of the consignment. More than half the bangles were damaged. In the Damage Certificate Ex. A-2 issued by the railway authorities the 'Hijack' value of the bangles was men...
AutofIn Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-24-1974
Reported in: [1977]106ITR638(AP)
Ramachandra Rao, J. 1. This is an application filed under Article 226 of the Constitution, to issue a writ of certiorari calling for the records relating to the proceedings in S & P No. 31/72-73, dated October 20, 1972, of the Commissioner of Income-tax, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad, and to quash the same.2. The first petitioner, M/s. Autofin Ltd., is a company registered under the Companies Act, and the second petitioner is the managing director of the said company. The company is an assessee under the Income-tax Act, and the second petitioner is assessed in two capacities---as an individual, and also as karta of a Hindu undivided family. The assessments of the company are pending from the year 1970-71. The assessments of the Hindu undivided family are also pending from the said year (1970-71), whereas the assessments in the individual case are pending from 1972-73. These assessment proceedings are pending before the Income-tax Officer, 'A' Ward, Company Circle, Hyderabad (2nd respondent...
G.M. Deshi Vs. Assistant Collector of Central Excise and Customs and a ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-24-1974
Reported in: 1978(2)ELT578(AP)
Muktadur J.The petitioner is a general merchant and also trades in matches. He is, of course, not a producer or manufacturer of matches not a dealer within the meaning of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944. On 12-11-1971, the officers of the Central Excise Department Seized 68 match bundles of five gross from the possession of the petitioner on the ground that he was not able to produce documents proving the payment of Central Excise Duty. The petitioner produced Invoice No. 1 dated 23-8-1971 and letters dated 20-9-1971 which would show that the matches Were supplied by Messrs, Karnataka Agencies, Mysore-1. Messrs, Karnataka Agencies, Mysore-1 are not also manufacturers or producers. Later, however, the Asstt. Collector of Central Excise, Sivakasi, issued a show cause notice dated 24-4-1972 in his S. No. 333/71 calling upon the petitioners to show cause as to why the matches seized from the petitioner on 12-11-1971 should not be confiscated under Rule 9 Sub-rule (2) of the Central ...
Revenue Divisional Officer, Vijayawada Vs. T. Laxminarayana
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-22-1974
Reported in: AIR1975AP109
Chinnapa Reddy, J. 1. The question for consideration in this batch of petitions is whether the Government and the Government Pleaders hold a position of any greater privilege than other litigants and their lawyers. We are forced to pose the question in this blunt fashion because day after day we are faced with applications made by the Government Pleaders on behalf of the Government to condone enormous delays in preferring appeals and in paying proper court-fee. Now, the Limitation Act makes no distinction between the Government and other parties who come to the High Court with appeals in civil cases. We may notice that in Criminal cases a slight distinction is made between appeals filed by the State from orders of acquittal for which the Limitation Act provides ninety days and appeals by convicted persons against judgments of conviction for which the Act provides sixty days only. We may also note with satisfaction that hardly ever an application is made by the Public Prosecutor on beha...
Syed Khaja Vs. Raghavendra Rao and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-22-1974
Reported in: [1976]103ITR294(AP)
Sambasiva Rao, J. 1. While finding a suit for specific performance of an agreement of sale in his favour, the plaintiff deposited into court the balance of the consideration money agreed upon under the agreement, along with the amounts necessary for executing and registering a sale deed in his favour. Can this amount be considered as ' belonging' to him within the meaning of Section 226(4) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 It is this question that arises for decision in this revision petition brought under Article 227 of the Constitution.2. Let me at the outset note the material facts. The suit for specific performance is O.S. No. 13 of 1962, in the City Civil Court, Hyderabad. Respondent No. 2 in the revision petition executed the agreement of sale on October 9, 1962, in favour of the petitioner (plaintiff) agreeing to sell a house in Secunderabad for Rs. 60,000. A sum of Rs. 20,000 was paid on that day itself. However, the second respondent sold the property to respondents Nos. 3 to 8 on w...
B.V.R. Reddy Vs. the Adoni Co-operative Central Stores Ltd. and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-18-1974
Reported in: AIR1975AP96
ORDERRamachandra Raju, J.1. The plaintiff in O. S. No. 13/68 on the file of the Court of the Subordinate Judge, Adoni is the petitioner. In the suit, he filed a document which was found to be a lease deed requiring payment of stamp duty and registration. The Court below directed the petitioner to pay the required stamp duty and penalty. But instead of complying with that order, the petitioner filed an application under Section 38(2) of the Indian Stamp Act to send the same to the Collector so that he may determine and collect the proper duty and penalty payable on the document. This, the lower Court refused by holding that the document cannot now be sent to the Collector under Section 38(2) of the Stamp Act as the Civil Court is the competent authority to decide as to the amount of stamp duty and penalty to be collected. It is true as provided under Section 35 of the Stamp Act no instrument chargeable with duty shall be admitted in evidence for any purpose unless such instrument is dul...
Allam Venkateswara Reddy Vs. Golla Venkatanarayana and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-17-1974
Reported in: AIR1975AP122
ORDERRamachandra Raju, J. 1. The only point for consideration in this Civil Revision Petition is whether in a suit filed for cancellation of a document the court-fee shall be computed on the value for which the document sought to be cancelled was executed or the court-fee shall be computed on the present market value of the property covered by the document sought to be cancelled as on the date of the suit. The lower court in the first instance ordered payment of the court-fee on the basis of the value for which the documents were executed, viz., a sum of Rupees 18,000/-. Subsequently when another Subordinate Judge came to preside over the court, he took Dp the matter once again and came to the conclusion that for cancellation of the two sale deeds in question the court-fee should be computed on the basis of the present market value of the properties for which the sate deeds were executed. He accordingly directed the petitioner-plaintiff to pay the deficit court-fee. It is assailing tha...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Smt. Batool Begum
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-17-1974
Reported in: [1976]104ITR642(AP)
Obul Reddi, C.J. 1. The following question has been referred to this court for decision at the instance of the Commissioner of Income-tax under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee should be given credit for the tax deducted at source on dividends derived from the shares held in the name of Shri C. B. Taraporewala ?' 2. The facts culminating in this reference are these : The assessee is one Smt. Batool Begum. She was assessed through the trustees of the Nizam's Supplemental Family Trust on the income from dividends in respect of certain shares in some companies. The shares were all held in the name of Shri C. B. Taraporewala, the executive officer of the trust. The Income-tax Officer did not give credit for the tax deducted at source on the ground that Rule 30A of the Income-tax Rules does not cover the case. But on appeal, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner upheld the assessee's claim and directed the I...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »