Andhra Pradesh Court December 1975 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.
Addl. Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. T. Nagireddy and Co.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-15-1975
Reported in: [1976]105ITR669(AP); [1978]41STC223(AP)
Sambasiva Rao, Actg. C.J.1. The assessee is a firm dealing in jaggery. During the assessment year 1968-69 it had collected sales-tax amounting to Rs. 17,710 and got refund from the department in a sum of Rs. 8,228. They were not accounted for as trading receipts. When called upon to explain the omission, it stated before the Income-tax Officer that the sales-tax account in its entirety is recorded as liability since it had to be paid. The dispute relating thereto was pending before the Supreme Court and a stay of payment was granted. That was a statutory liability and not a contingent one. The sales-tax authorities had reopened all the assessments consequent on appeal decision and revised orders may be passed by the authorities requiring the firm to repay the refund amount. The assessingauthority rejected this contention of the firm and treated the entire amount of Rs. 25,938 as its income. In appeal, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner also held that the assessee colud not claim anyt...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Maduri Rajaiahgari Kistaiah
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-12-1975
Reported in: [1979]120ITR294(AP)
Kondaiah, J.1. At the instance of the CIT and pursuant to the direction given by this court, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench, submitted under Section 256(2) of the I.T. Act, 1961, an agreed statement of the case for our opinion on the following question :' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and Income-tax Appellate Tribunal were justified in holding that a separate addition on the basis of unexplained cash credits was not permissible in view of the addition made on the basis of gross profit '2. In order to appreciate the scope of the question, it is necessary to briefly state the material facts that gave rise to the same. The respondent-assessee is a firm constituted by two partners, Sri Maduri Rajeswara Rao and Sri Maduri Narasimha Rao, carrying on business in cloth. For the assessment year 1960-61 (corresponding accounting year commencing from November 11, 1958, and ending with November 30, 1959), the IT...
Bansilal Vyas Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-11-1975
Reported in: [1978]113ITR537(AP)
A. Sambasiva Rao, Actg. C.J. 1. An interesting problem has come up to us through this reference. The question on which our opinion is sought is :' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the sums of Rs. 3,944 and Rs. 8,127 were ineludible in the hands of the assessee for the assessment years 1966-67 and 1967-68, under Section 64(iii) of the Income-tax Act '2. This is a reference at the instance of the assessee. The material facts are : The assessee, who is an old gentleman doing business, did not have any male children. He wanted to take his younger brother's son in adoption. Since this was after the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act of 1956, his wife's consent became necessary. The lady, however, was not willing to give her consent except under certain conditions. In her letter dated December 1, 1964, she expressed apprehension that the proposedadoption would curtail her prospective rights to inherit all the properties by one-half and also for the reason that the...
Kashiram Vs. Income-tax Officer, E-ward
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-10-1975
Reported in: [1977]107ITR825(AP)
Jeevan Reddy, J.1. In both these writ petitions, a common question is raised, namely, the constitutional validity of Sub-section (3) of Section 140A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and, therefore, can be disposed of by a common order. It would be sufficient to state the facts in writ petition No. 7974 of 1973.2. The petitioner is a partner in the firm of M/s. Sreeram and Company, Jambah Road, Hyderabad, and is an income-tax assessee. For the assessment year 1968-69, he filed a return on October 3, 1968, declaring an income of Rs. 25,285. Since the tax payable on the said income is more than Rs. 500, the assessee had to pay the tax due according to his return within 30 days of the filing of the return, as required by Sub-section (1) of Section 140A of the Act. The petitioner, admittedly, did not pay the same and hence proceedings for levying penalty under Sub-section (3) were commenced by issuing a show-cause notice, to which the petitioner replied on March 22, 1971, contending that inasmu...
Addl. Commissioner of Income-tax and anr. Vs. Dargapandarinath Tuljayy ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-10-1975
Reported in: 1977(2)AnWR47; 1976(1)APLJ43
Chinnappa Reddy, J.1. The respondent-assessee, a firm, failed to file its returns for the years 1965-66 to 1969-70, within the time stipulated by the Act. The firm submitted an explanation that the returns could not be filed in time because the person who was in-charge of the accounts of the firm was unable to attend to its affairs for some time owing to some personal reasons. The Income-tax Officer did not accept the explanation. He levied penalties. The assessee preferred revision petitions before the Commissioner of Income-tax. Before the Commissioner it was represented that the delay was due to family troubles. The Commissioner did not accept the explanation. He rejected the revision petitions. The assessee filed writ petitions in the High Court. Obul Reddy J. (as he then was) quashed the orders of the Commissioner on the ground that penalties could only be imposed if it was found that the assessee acted deliberately in defiance of the law or was guilty of contumacious or dishonest...
The Public Prosecutor Vs. Gundu Rao
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-10-1975
Reported in: 1976CriLJ1835
Punnayya, J.1. This appeal is directed against the order of acquittal passed by the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Gooty in C. C. No. 177/1972. The learned Magistrate took into consideration the facts that the complaint was filed in 1972 by the Excise Sub-Inspector under A. P. Excise Act and he did not choose to produce witnesses before the Court, though several adjournments were granted and though summons for the production of witnesses were taken, they were not served or returned and hence passed the impugned orders holding that the prosecution has no witnesses to produce and they are not interested to prosecute the matter. He, therefore, applied the provisions of Section 251A (11), Cr. P.C. and acquitted the accused.2. Sri Srinivasa Rao, the learned Public Prosecutor, contends that the Magistrate has no power to acquit the accused under Section 251-A (11), Cr. P.C. since the case does not come under the said provision, He further contends that the Magistrate should have taken coer...
The Yemmiganur Spinning Mills Limited and anr. Vs. State of Andhra Pra ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-09-1975
Reported in: [1976]37STC314(AP)
Jeevan Reddy, J.1. The petitioners are registered dealers under the Central Sales Tax Act and the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act dealing in cotton and cotton yarn. By G.O. Ms. No. 167 (Revenue) dated 9th February, 1971, issued under Section 9(1) of the State Act, the State Government granted exemption in the case of sales of hank yarn from the levy of tax under the said Act with effect from 9th February, 1971. The petitioners say that on account of the said exemption, they were not charging or collecting the sales tax from their customers on the sales of the said commodity. However, it appears that the State Government issued another notification in G.O. Ms. No. 437 (Revenue) dated 18th May, 1971, rescinding the said G.O. Ms. No. 167 with effect from 19th April, 1971. The said G.O. was, however, published in the Andhra Pradesh Gazette only on 1st July, 1971. The petitioners say that they knew of the said rescinding G.O. only in the second week of July when a copy of the same was ...
The Andhra Bank Limited, Represented by Its General Manager Vs. Indust ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-09-1975
Reported in: (1976)ILLJ521AP
Ramachandra Raju, J.1. The Andhra Bank Limited, Hyderabad, is the petitioner. The three respondents respectively are the Industrial Tribunal (Central), Hyderabad, the Andhra Bank Employees' Association and the Andhra Bank Employees' Union. The writ petition is filed to quash the order passed by the Industrial Tribunal In Industrial Dispute No. 18 of 1971 on a preliminary objection raised by the petitioner-Bank to the effect that the reference is incompetent and that no industrial dispute exists between Grade III Officers and the management of the Bank. The reference to the Industrial Tribunal was asked by respondents 2 and 3 on the ground that an industrial dispute exists between the workers and the management of the Bank with regard to fitment of Grade III Officers of the Bank who are promoted from the clerical staff, i.e., with regard to fixation of pay in the time pay scale of Grade III Officers on the clerical staff being promoted to Grade III Officers category.2. The reference mad...
Governing Body of Rangaraya Medical College Vs. Income-tax Officer, A- ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-08-1975
Reported in: [1979]117ITR284(AP)
Jeevan Reddy, J. 1. This writ petition is filed by the governing body of Rangaraya Medical College represented by its secretary and principal, Mr. D. Sundarasiva Rao, for issuance of a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction quashing the assessment order dated March 30, 1974, passed by the respondent, ITO, A-Ward, Circle I, Kaki-nada. Under the said order pertaining to the assessment year 1973-74, the ITO treated the petitioner, a society registered under the Societies Registration Act, as an association, of persons, overruling its claim of being exempt from taxation by virtue of Clause (22) of Section 10 of the Act. It was held that the petitioner-society is founded on April 16, 1964, to manage the Rangaraya Medical College which was started by another society, namely, the Medical Education Society, Kakinada, six years earlier and that the college and the managing society are two different entities. It was further pointed out that there is no registered do...
Sri Jagannadha Sway Vari Temple Vadali Vs. Bokinala Nikodev and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-05-1975
Reported in: AIR1976AP253
1. The appellant had filed an application under Order 34, Rule 6, C.P.C. for passing of a personal decree against respondents 1 to 3. That application for personal decree was resisted by the 2nd respondent on the ground that the application was barred by time. The two courts below held that the application was barred by time. It was also held by the lower appellate Court that the application also was barred by reason of Explanation V to Section 11, C.P.C.2. The facts leading up to this appeal may briefly be stated. The appellant will be referred to as the plaintiff in this appeal. The plaintiff filed O.S. No. 87 of 1962 on the file of the court of the Dist. Munsif, Gudivada. The suit was based upon a registered lease deed and a security bond executed for due performance of the terms of the lease. Preliminary and final decree were passed. The sale held in execution of the decree fetched a sum of Rs. 775 and part satisfaction of Rs. 711-25 was recorded. As the entire decree was not satis...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »