Andhra Pradesh Court September 1979 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 Income-tax Vs. Karkhana Zinda Tilismath
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-28-1979
Reported in: (1980)15CTR(AP)235; [1980]123ITR814(AP)
Kondaiah, C.J.1. This is a reference made by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench, pursuant to the order of this court in I.T.C. Nos. 32 and 33 of 1972, dated March 6, 1974, under Section 256(2) of the I.T. Act, 1961, for the opinion of this court on the following question of law ;' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessment of the association of persons otherwise called as unregistered firm was proper and legal, the members of the association or the partners as they are called, of this association or partnership having been assessed in respect of their share of income from this business of association of persons, otherwise called partnership earlier '2. In order to understand the scope of the question, we will briefly state the material facts admitted or found by the Tribunal which gave rise to the aforesaid question. The respondent-assessee is a firm constituted with 15 partners, consisting of 9 major partners and 6 minors admitted to the...
Ramchander Rao and ors. Vs. Boina Ramchander and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-28-1979
Reported in: 1980CriLJ593
Amareswari, J.1. This case is before us on a reference made by our learned brother Muktadar, J. having regard to the importance of the question namely whether the proviso to Section 202 of the Cr. P. C. imposes an obligation on the Magistrate to examine all the witnesses cited by the complainant before issuing process to the accused.2. This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition was filed by 29 accused for quashing the proceedings in P. R. C. No. 3 of 1979 on the file of Munsif Magistrate, Zahirabad.3. The relevant facts are as follows:On 23-8-1978 there was rioting in the village of Singtham, Zahirabad Taluk, Medak District, in which a person died. A complaint was lodged at Zahirabad Police Station on 24-8-1978 at 8 P. M, implicating the 29 petitioners herein and another. After registering the case and completing the investigation, the Inspector of Police, Crime Branch, CID, Hyderabad filed a charge-sheet against the petitioners 11 to 29 alone. The Police did not file a charge-sheet against ...
Kalki Subbarami Reddy Vs. Government of India and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-27-1979
Reported in: AIR1980AP147
ORDER1. This matter arises under the Mines and Minerals (Regulation and Development) Act, 1957. The petitioner made an application to the Government of Andhra Pradesh on 22-7- 1975 under the aforesaid Act seeking grant of a mining lease for mica over an extent of Ac. 20- 05 cents in Kalichedu village. Rapur Taluk, Nellore District. This application of the petitioner was made under the Mineral concession Rules, 1960 made under the aforesaid Act. Rules requires the State Government to 'dispose of the application within twelve months from the date of its receipt'. Where the State Government rejects an application for grant of a lease, Rule 54 of the aforesaid Rules provides for a revision to the Central Government within three months from the date of the communication of the order refusing to grant the lease. The Statute added an Explanation to R. 54. This Explanation deals with a situation where the State Government keeps the application for the grant of a mining lease without disposing ...
V.V. Ramachandra Rao and ors. Vs. the State of Andhra Pradesh and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-27-1979
Reported in: AIR1980AP68
S. Reddy, J.1. The social welfare measure and so the social justice is stultified to derelict observance of the procedural law. The consequences, however, are appalling, which will be apparent from the text of the judgement which presently follows.2. Poor people erected some huts on the pavements and road margins, which became the cause for not only hazardous traffic problems but also accidents of serious nature. Faced with this, a suitable site in the vicinity was sought to be acquired under the land Acquisition Act by simultaneously invoking the urgency clause. Hence the emergence of the notification dated 3- 2- 1978 under section 4 and 17 of the Act, which is subjected to challenge in this writ petition. The notification is assailed primarily on the ground that the notification published on the official Gazette has neither been signed nor approved by the 'District revenue officer, and non- compliance of the same would vitiate the entire notification.3. Section 4(1) of the Land Acqui...
C.S. Ramachandra Rao Vs. Land Acquisition Officer, Visakhapatnam and a ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-26-1979
Reported in: AIR1980AP115
Lakshmaiah, J.1. The point that arise for consideration in this case is whether a person who has received the first instalment of amount of compensation awarded otherwise then under protest is entitled to make an application under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act 1894 to have the matter referred by the Collector for the determination of the Court.2. The petitioner owns an extent of 4.37354sq. feet in T. S. No. 640 of Vizianagaram Municipality that was acquired under award No. 12/78 dated 20-5-1978 for provision of house sites to scheduled caste people. The possession was also handed over on 12-6-1978.3. Notice under Sections 9(3) and 10 of the Land Acquisition Act 1894 (hereinafter referred to merely as 'the Act') posting the enquiry under Section 11 of the Act to 5-3-1977 was issued on 4-2-1977. The award enquiry was conducted on 5-3-1977. During the enquiry under Section 11 of the Act the petitioner did not file any claim statement. An award bearing No. 12/78 was passed on 20-5...
Sree Balajee Rice Working Co. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-21-1979
Reported in: [1983]139ITR213(AP)
Alladi Kuppuswami, J.1. The assessee is a firm consisting of eight partners and was constituted under an instrument of partnership dated December 11, 1967. An application for registration was filed on March 8, 1968, before the ITO who, after examining the partners and consideringall the circumstances of the case, came to the conclusion that except two partners, Thunuguntla Veera Raghavaiah and Vissamsetti Lakshmikantha Rao, the other partners were not real partners and, therefore, the partnership was not genuine. On appeal, the AAC also came to the conclusion, on a careful appraisal of all the facts and circumstances of the case, that as the firm, as constituted by the instrument of partnership, dated December 11, 1967, did not really exist, it was not entitled to registration under the Act. On further appeal, the I.T. Appellate Tribunal also considered the evidence and other circumstances of the case and held that the Revenue authorities were right in refusing registration. An applica...
Kolla Venkatanarayana Vs. Special Secretary to Government of India and ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-21-1979
Reported in: 1981(8)ELT171(AP)
Jeevant Reddy, J.1. The petitioner in both these Writ Petitions is the same person. The petitioner purchased two consignments of VFC tobacco. One consignment, concerned in Writ Petition No. 1660 of 1978, is 832307 Kgs. while in the other case it is 1173349 Kgs He had purchased the same for processing (grading) on 24-2-1972 and 18-2-72 respectively. The consignment was under processing from 24-2-1972 to 20-5-1972 in the first case and from 18-2-1972 to 19-3-1972 in the second case. After processing the quantities referred to above were found short in the first case by 3.62% and in the second case by 3.38%. The Petitioner submitted an explanation stating that the variation was due to natural causes and requested that the same may be condoned.2. The Collector, Central Excise, Guntur issued a show cause notice dated 27-2-1974 calling upon the petitioner to show cause as to why duty should not be demanded from him for the shortages also under Rule 160 of Central Excise Rules. The petitioner...
Addl. Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Khayam Constructions
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-20-1979
Reported in: [1980]123ITR573(AP)
C. Kondaiah, C.J.1. Pursuant to the direction given by this court under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench, has submitted a statement of case for the opinion of this court on the following question of law :' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and on a correct interpretation of Section 285A(2) of the Act, the Appellate Tribunal was justified in cancelling the fine levied by the Commissioner of Income-tax ?'2. The assessee had entered into a contract with the Reserve Bank of India for a sum of about Rs. 5 lakhs on March 27, 1967, for the construction of a building for it at Hyderabad. The assessee did not furnish the particulars as per the provisions of Section 285A(1) read with Rule 120 of the I.T. Rules. The Commissioner initiated proceedings for the levy of fine under Section 285A(2) and issued a show-cause notice to the respondent-assessee as to why he should not...
Additional Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Nizam Sugar Factory
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-07-1979
Reported in: [1981]127ITR423(AP)
Kondaiah, C.J.1. This is a reference made by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench, under Section 256(2) of the I.T. Act, 1961, pursuant to the directions of this court for the opinion of this court on the following question of law :' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and on a correct interpretation of Section 2(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961, and Rule 7 of the I.T. Rules, 1962, the portion of expenses incurred by the assessee-company on its agricultural operations for raising sugarcane was allowable in computing the income from business '2. At the outset we may point out that the aforesaid question does not arise out of the order of the Tribunal. We shall state the admitted facts which are as follows : The assessee is a limited company manufacturing sugar from the sugarcane grown on its lands. The sugar-cane grown by the assessee and purchased from other ryots was being used as raw material for the purpose of manufacturing sugar. While computing the tot...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›