Andhra Pradesh Court July 1976 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.
Commissioner of Wealth-tax Vs. R.D. Chand and
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-30-1976
Reported in: [1977]108ITR787(AP)
Muktadar, J.1. These two references by the Wealth-tax Appellate Tribunal under Section 27(1) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, hereinafter referred to as 'the Act', are being disposed of by this common judgment as the questions of law arising in them are similar.2. In R. C. No. 51/74, the Wealth-tax Appellate Tribunal has formulated the following question :'Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the quantum of penalty determined by the Tribunal was in accordance with law ?'3. In R. C. No. 14/75, the Tribunal framed the following questions :'(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the quantum of penalty determined by the Tribunal was in accordance with law? (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, penalty is leviable under Section 18(1)(a) of the Wealth-tax Act for the assessment years 1964-65 to 1968-69 notwithstanding the fact that the Wealth-tax Officer granted time for filing the wealth-tax returns till March 20, 1970, pursuant...
Mata Rama Rao and Sons, Srikakulam Vs. the Chief Controlling Revenue A ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-26-1976
Reported in: AIR1977AP292
Muktadar, J.1. The Board of Revenue which is the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority has posed the following questions for our consideration:'1. Whether the document dated 1-4-1964 is a simple 'deed of partnership' or 2. Whether it is both a 'partition' and 'partnership' as adjudicated by the D.I.G. Visakhapatnam.' 2. The facts leading to this reference are these: During the course of inspection of records of the Income Tax Office, Srikakulam, 'A' Ward the Deputy Inspector General of Registration and Stamps, Visakhapatnam, came across a document which in his view was insufficiently stamped, and therefore he impounded it and levied a stamp duty of Rs. 1,695/- and penalty of Rs. 5/- thereon. Aggrieved by the order of the D.I.G. , Registration and Stamps, the executants of the document preferred a revision to the Board of Revenue. The Board considered the matter and on the request of the petitioner before the Board, referred the matter by formulating the above questions. The document und...
Srikrishna Jute Mills Vs. Government of A.P. and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-23-1976
Reported in: (1977)IILLJ363AP
B.J. Divan, C.J.1. This writ appeal against the judgment of Sriramulu, J. sitting singly in Writ Petition No. 5490 of 1972, arises under the following circumstances. The petitioner, 'Sri Krishna Jute Mills', is a jute factory which was set op at Eluru for the manufacture of jute gunnies and twine. For this purpose, it engaged a large number of workmen. Two unions of workmen of the petitioner jute Mill have been formed; one is Jute Labour Union, which is registered under the Trade Union Act and the other is Jateeya Jute Karmika Sangam, which represents certain categories of workmen. On September 16, 1968, in connection with certain matters arising out of the working of the petitioner-factory, rioting took place, which resulted in the murder of one of the workers of the petitioner-factory. Respondents 4 to 10 herein were prosecuted for the murder of the said workman. They were convicted by the Sessions Judge, Eluru, in Sessions Case No. 37 of 1968 and sentenced to various terms of impris...
Edara Pavana Venkateswara Mitra Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-23-1976
Reported in: 1977CriLJ470
ORDERGangadhara Rao, J.1. I have disposed of this criminal revision on merits on 8th April, 1976. Smt. Ramaseshamma an advocate filed this revision. The case was posted in the daily list for hearing. Still she did not appear and the matter was disposed of on merits by me.2. Now this petition is filed by Sri Y. Sivarama Sastry that I should set aside my order dated 8th April 1976 and re-hear the matter.3. I am afraid I cannot do that. This is not a case where the petitioner's advocate had no notice of the hearing of the petition. Secondly, I cannot dismiss a criminal revision for default of the appearance of the party or the advocate. Thirdly, I have disposed of the matter on merits.4. In this connection the learned Counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the decisions in Keshav Lal v. Gaveria ; Ram Dass v. State : AIR1952All926 ; Mohammad Wasi v. State : AIR1951All441 ; T. Somu Naidu in re AIR 1924 Mad 640 : 26 Cri LJ 370, Lal Singh v. State and Swarth Mahto v. Dharmdeo : 1972CriLJ8...
Surana and Company Vs. the State of A.P. and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-21-1976
Reported in: [1977]40STC192(AP)
Gangadhara Rao, J.1. This appeal Is filed against the Judgment of Chinnappa Reddy, J., in Writ Petition No. 694 of 1974. The question for our consideration is whether the appellant, a dealer in sugar-candy, has to pay sales tax under the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957. Under Section 6 of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957, sales or purchases of declared goods by a dealer shall be liable to tax at the rate and only at the point of sale or purchase, specified against each in the Third Schedule on his turnover of such sales or purchases for each year. Item 12 in the Third Schedule is 'sugar-candy' and it is to be taxed at the point of first sale in the State. Thus, reading Section 6 along with entry 12 in the Third Schedule, the appellant is liable to pay sales tax on the 'sugar-candy'. But the learned counsel for the appellant, with reference to the definition of 'declared goods', argued that 'sugar' includes 'sugar-candy' and since 'sugar' is exempted from the pa...
Controller of Estate Duty Vs. Estate of Late Omprakash Bajaj
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-20-1976
Reported in: [1977]110ITR263(AP)
B.J. Divan, C.J. 1. In this reference, at the instance of the revenue, the following question has been referred by the Tribunal for our opinion :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the estate duty payable on the estate was deductible while computing the estate duty payable on the principal value of the estate passing on the death under the Estate Duty Act ?'2. The facts leading to this reference are as follows : The deceased, Sri Om-prakash Bajaj, expired on June 4, 1971. His estate duty assessment was completed by the Assistant Controller of Estate Duty on July 29, 1972, and he computed the net principal value of the estate at Rs. 3,68,518 as against Rs. 3,45,420 admitted by the accountable person. On this it was computed that an estate duty of Rs. 39,130 way payable. The accountable person filed an appeal before the Appellate Controller and he contended that the estate duty payable should have been allowed as a liability in computing the net principal value o...
Thakur V. Hariprasad Vs. State of A.P.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-19-1976
Reported in: 1977CriLJ471
ORDERMadhusudan Rao, J.1. The Inspector of Police C.B.C.I.D. Hyderabad filed 11 charge-sheets against the petitioner in the year 1971. The petitioner was granted bail in all the 11 cases and the cases are now pending trial before the III Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad. One of the cases is C.C. 500/75 in which the petitioner is being tried for offences punishable under Sections 420, 468 and 421 I.P.C. After the commencement of the examination of the witnesses for the prosecution in some of the cases, in June, 1976 the prosecution filed an application in the court of the Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad under Section 439(2) Cr.P.C. requesting the Court to cancel the bail granted to the petitioner in C.C. No. 500/75. It was alleged in the application that the petitioner was trying to win over the witnesses and that his being at large would be highly detrimental to the prosecution. In support of the submission that the petitioner was interfering with the prosecution witnesses, th...
Navadu Nuka Raju Vs. Rajani China Appanna and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-14-1976
Reported in: AIR1977AP15
ORDER1. A point of some import is raised in this revision petition. It relates to applications for leave to file suit in forma pauperis. The question is whether a duty is cast on an applicant for such leave to disclose all the properties belonging to him in his application and if he does not, whether such non-disclosure would entail dismissal of his application.2. The material facts are : The petitioner filed a suit for eviction of the respondents from certain properties and for delivering the same to him. He filed an application to file the suit in forma pauperis and in the B Schedule appended to the petition he had shown half joint share in a thatched house worth about Rs. 500/- and few items of apparel. The Court-fee payable is Rs. 1,546/-. The respondents opposed this application saying that he had means to pay the Court-fee and the he had not disclosed in the petition all his assets. In fact in the cross-examination of the petitioner, examined as P.W. 1, it was brought out that he...
Commissioner of Gift-tax Vs. Ch. Chandrasekhara Reddy
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-07-1976
Reported in: [1976]105ITR849(AP)
B.J. Divan, C.J. 1. In this case, at the instance of the revenue, the following question has been referred to this High Court for its opinion : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the transfer of lands made by the assessee to his only daughter fell within the meaning of 'taxable gift' under the Gift-tax Act ?' 2. The facts leading to this reference are as follows : The assessee transferred 10 acres and 54 cents of wet land in Nellore district to his only daughter, C. Vijayalakshmi, he having no son, in consideration of her marriage. The betrothal had taken place on October 15, 1966, and the marriage took place on March I, 1967, and on January 1, 1967, i.e., during the period between the betrothal and the marriage, the assessee transferred 10 acres and 54 cents of land to his daughter. Before the Gift-tax Officer, the assessee contended that this transfer did not amount to a gift as contemplated by the Gift-tax Act, as the appropriation of joint family funds for...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›