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.
Satyanarayana Srinivas Bung Vs. the State of Andhra Pradesh and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-15-1974
Reported in: [1975]35STC617(AP)
ORDERRamachandra Rao, J.1. The petitioner in these two writ petitions is M/s. Satyanarayana Srinivas Bung, which is a firm registered under the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957, hereinafter called the 'State Act' and the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, hereinafter called the 'Central Act'. For the assessment year 1963-64, the petitioner was assessed to tax under the Central Act by the Commercial Tax Officer, Nizamabad, by his order dated 27 th February, 1965. The period for which the assessment relates to is 1st April, 1963, to 15th November, 1963. The petitioner claimed exemption from tax liability on the inter-State sales of paddy, turmeric and gunny bags contending that they were subject to tax at the purchase point under the State Act and therefore not liable to be taxed under the Central Act. The Commercial Tax Officer disallowed the claim for exemption. In respect of the period 16th November, 1963, to 31st March, 1964, similar exemption was claimed by the...
The State of Andhra Pradesh Vs. the Associated Tanners
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-15-1974
Reported in: [1975]36STC32(AP)
A. Sambasiva Rao, J.1. These two are connected matters and are concerned with recovery of Central sales tax on tanned hides and skins. The respondent in the tax revision case is the petitioner in the writ petition. The principal question that arises in both the matters is whether dressed hides and skins, which have been tanned out of hides and skins, which had suffered tax under the State sales tax law are generally exempt from further tax so as to attract the nil rate envisaged by Section 8(2A) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. While the assessment which is in question in the tax revision case is for the year 1968-69, the writ petition is about the assessment of the year 1972-73.2. The dealer in this case is M/s. The Associated Tanners, Vizianaga-ram. They deal in hides and skins besides being tanners. They registered themselves as dealers both under the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957, as well as the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. For the year 1968-69 it reported a total t...
In Re Public Prosecutor
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-10-1974
Reported in: 1975CriLJ141
Kondaiah, J.1. This matter has been posted before me for orders on the sus-tainability or otherwise of the office objection.2. A memorandum of appeal against the order of acquittal of the accused-respondent has been filed by the State of Andhra Pradesh on 9^4-1974 beyond the period of limitation prescribed therefor. An application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 to condone the delay in preferring the appeal was also filed. The office insisted upon the filing of a duly stamped petition for leave to prefer the said appeal under Section 378(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Act No. 2 of 1974) which came into force from 1-4-1974. The question therefore for determination is whether or not a duly stamped petition by the State for leave to appeal against the order of acquittal of the respondent-accused is necessary. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor pressed upon me that such an application for granting special leave to appeal from the order of acquittal is necessa...
In Re: P. Raghava Reddi
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-09-1974
Reported in: AIR1975AP123
S. Obul Reddi, C.J.1. As the vires of Section 33 of the Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Samithis and Zilla Parishads Act, 1959 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) was questioned before our learned brother, Venkatrama Sastry, J., he directed the writ petition to be posted before a Division Bench and that is how this petition is before us.2. The facts necessary for determination of the question raised by Mr. Choudary viz., that Section 33 of the Act is ultra vires are these. The petitioner was elected as the president of the Panchayat Samithi Venkata-giri on 7-8-1970 for a term of five years. That election was held by secret ballot. The total membership of the Venkatagiri Gram Panchayat is 67 and that strength includes six co-opted members, of whom one is a Harijan, one Schedule tribe, two women, two general, one M. L. A., one M. L. C. and President of the Panchayat Samithi. A motion expressing want of confidence in the petitioner, who is the President of the Panchayat Samithi, was submitted t...
Guntur Merchants Cotton Press Co. Ltd. Vs. Income-tax Officer, A-ward
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-05-1974
Reported in: [1977]108ITR620(AP)
Obul Reddi, C.J.1. The short question that arises in this writ appeal is whether the assessee is entitled to the benefit of Section 30(a)(ii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Section 30(a)(ii) is in these terms :'In respect of rent, rates, taxes, repairs and insurance for premises, used for the purposes of the business or profession, the following deductions shall be allowed- (a) where the premises are occupied by the assessee--...... (ii) otherwise than as a tenant, the amount paid by him on account of current repairs to the premises.' 2. The question before us is whether the repairs in respect of which the assessee claimed deduction are 'current repairs' to the premises. The learned single judge was not prepared to hold that the repairs in question were 'current repairs' to the premises. In that view, he dismissed the writ petition.3. The facts necessary for determination of the question involved are these:The appellant is a public limited company. It submitted return for the assessment ...
Puvvula Abbulu Vs. the State Station House Officer, Law and Order
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-02-1974
Reported in: 1975CriLJ139
Chinnappa Reddy, J.1. In Alapati Sriramamurti In re (1959) 2 Andh WR 1 : (1959 Cri LJ 822) (FB) a Full Bench of the Andhra Pradesh High Court following Veera Ramayya v. Seshavatharam, 1955 Andh WR 888 : (1956 Cri Lj 571 (2)) laid down a rule of practice that, except under exceptional circumstances, the High Court would not entertain a revision petition under Sections 435 and 439 of the Criminal Procedure Code of 1898 unless the Sessions Judge was moved in the first instance. While laying down the rule of practice the Full Bench noticed that such was the rule of practice followed by the High Courts of Allahabad, Bombay, Calcutta, etc. though not of the Madras High Court or the Andhra Pradesh High Court until the decision in Veera Ramayya v, Seshavataram. The Full Bench thus consciously departed from the practice followed by the Madras High Court and the Andhra Pradesh High Court till then, with a view to fall in line with the other High Courts. But that was under the Criminal Procedure ...
Ravella Venkata Subbaiah (Died) and ors. Vs. Pydipati Venkata Subbaiah ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-01-1974
Reported in: AIR1975AP217
Kondaiah, J.1. This appeal by the 8th defendant in O. S. No. 74 of 1951 on the file of the Court of the Subordinate Judge, Ongole, gives rise to an interesting question of law, whether a coparcener of a Hindu Joint family who has obtained a preliminary decree for partition of the family properties is entitled to proceed against the property alienated by any defendant-coparcener pending an appeal against the preliminary decree and before the passing of the final decree, for the recovery of mesne profits in respect or that alienated item of property.2. In order to appreciate the scope of the question, it is necessary to state briefly the facts and circumstances which are not in dispute and which lie in a short compass; Raghavaiah and Venkata Subbaiah, sons of P. Sriramulu, instituted a suit for partition and separate possession of their half share in the plaint 'A' and 'B' schedule properties and for accounts relating to future profits and rents, against their brother Gopalam (1st defend...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›