Andhra Pradesh Court April 1983 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.
Challa Ramamurty Vs. Pasumarti Adinarayana Sons
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-15-1983
Reported in: AIR1985AP42
Amareswari, J.1. Common questions of law of considerable importance are raised in this group of revision petitioners. They are heard together and disposed of by this judgment. The facts:In execution proceedings by the decree-holders, the judgment-debtors contended that they were small farmers within the meaning of Act 7 of 1977 and the debt must be deemed to have been discharged. The plea was accepted in some and rejected in others depending on the evidence. Treating the decisions on this question as decrees, aggrieved parties filed appeals under S. 96 of the Civil P.C. Appeals were held to be maintainable in some and the cases were disposed of on merits. Some Courts took the view hat they are not maintainable in view of the amended sub-sec. (2) of S. 2 of C.P.C. Aggrieved by the said orders these revisions are filed.2. The contentions of behalf of the petitioners are two-fold. (1) Even after the amendment of sub-sec. (2) of S. 2 by Act 104 of 1976, decisions under S. 47 C.P.C. are dec...
Commissioner of Income-tax, Andhra Pradesh Vs. Devatha Chandraiah and ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-13-1983
Reported in: [1985]154ITR893(AP)
Seetharama Reddy, J.1. The question which has been referred for the answer at the instance of the Revenue is whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is justified in holding that the sales tax collections made by the assessee are not income of the assessee and not liable to be assessed in their hands and, in any event, liable to be deducted in computing the income. 2. The undisputed facts are : The assessee is a registered firm dealing as commission agent in several agricultural commodities and it was acting as the commission agent on behalf of the agriculturists, that is to say, the agriculturists bring their produce to the assessee for sale and it sells it on behalf of the agriculturists to various parties. Under the A.P. General Sales Tax Act, the commission agent, i.e., the assessee, is liable for sales tax if it is not able to prove that the sale made by it were not on behalf of the agriculturist principals. However, if it prove...
Commissioner of Income-tax, Andhra Pradesh Vs. Andhra Pradesh State Ro ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-13-1983
Reported in: [1984]148ITR184(AP)
Jagannadha Rao, J. 1. The question referred by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad, in this reference is as follows : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the interest on the sum of Rs. 14,86,360 paid on September 20, 1969, is payable under section 214 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?' 2. The following facts are stated by the Tribunal in the statement of cases : The assessee is the Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation, Hyderabad, plying buses on various routes in Andhra Pradesh. The assessee is a person hitherto assessed. In these proceedings we are concerned with the assessment year 1970-71 for which the financial year is 1969-70. 3. Advance tax was payable for the assessment year 1970-71 by the assessee. The latest regular assessment completed as at the beginning of the financial year 1969-70 was one for the assessment year 1964-65 by way of an assessment order dated March 28, 1969, which showed a loss of Rs. 1,63,425 as determined by the ITO....
Bommoneni Venu Naidu Vs. the Joint Collector, Nellore and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-13-1983
Reported in: AIR1985AP9
K. Madhava Reddy, Ag. C.J. 1. The appellant is the petitioner in Writ Petition 1934 of 1983 wherein the seizure of 118 bags of paddy, belonging to the petitioner, effected from his house and the initiation of proceedings under S. 6-A of the Essential Commodities Act, are questioned. 2. It is the case of the appellant that he had produced the paddy and kept the same in his house for his personal purpose. The third respondent-Deputy Superintendent of Police, Vigilance Cell, Civil Supplies Department - came to his house and seized the stock, and reported the matter to the Joint Collector, Nellore - the first respondent alleging that the appellant had violated the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Scheduled Commodities Order 1982 and Cl. (3) of the Andhra Pradesh Rice Procurement (Levy and Restriction on Sale) Order.3. The appellant whose writ petition has been disposed of with a direction that half of the seized stock may be sold and proceeds thereof credited to the account of the case ini...
Hyderabad Bottling Co. Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-12-1983
Reported in: 1987(27)ELT408(AP)
K. Madhava Reddy, C.J.1. This is a petition by Hyderabad Bottling Company Private Limited for the issue of a Writ of Mandumus directing the respondent to refund a sum of Rs. 4,52,938.55 alleged to have been collected in excess of what is payable under the Central Excises and Salt Act in respect of aerated waters bottled by them. The Petition for refund was rejected as beyond limitation. 2. The question whether they are entitled to refund or not when one of the petitions for refund was filed beyond the period prescribed under Rule 11 of the Central Excise Rules, came up for consideration before a Bench of this Court, to which one of us was a party. In Writ Petition 463 of 1978, and it was held that the petitioners are entitled to refund of the tax even though the petition is filed beyond the period of limitation prescribed by Rule 11 of the Central Excise Rules when the duty itself is collected without any authority. 3. While the petitioner is entitled to the refund of the excise duty p...
V. Sanjeevamma Vs. Yerram Purnamma and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-12-1983
Reported in: AIR1984AP28
P.A. Choudary, J.1. This civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed against an order of the learned Subordinate Judge, Narsaraopet passed in I. A. No. 2492 of 1932 in O. S. No. 22 of 1978 appointing a Receiver for the suit properties.2. O. S. No. 22 of 1978 has been filed by three respondents before us. They are Y. Purnamma, Gurram Papamma and K. Kusumaharanathababa Rani Kumari, who are all residents of Yedlapalli, Guntur District The suit was filed for declaration of their title and possession to the suit property. The suit was filed on the basis of a registered will, which was admittedly executed by one Katta Anjaneyulu on 7-5-1981 bequeathing a life estate in the suit properties to the first and the 2nd plaintiffs and the vested remainder to the third plaintiff. Katta Anjaneyulu apears to be a man of consdiereable property, but of no family happiness. During his lifetime he appears t have married thrice and engaged himself in several legal battles with his own daughter, the present appella...
Sri Balaji Rice Company Vs. Commercial Tax Officer No. I, Nellore and ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-08-1983
Reported in: [1984]55STC292(AP)
Ramachandra Rao, J.1. This batch of writ petitions is heard together and disposed of by a common judgment, as the major points that arise for consideration are common. 2. W.P. No. 4255 of 1982 : The petitioner herein is a registered dealer under the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act carrying on business in paddy and rice at Nellore. For the years 1979-80 and 1980-81 the petitioner filed returns of his turnovers before the 1st respondent, the Commercial Tax Officer No. I, Nellore, and the same were accepted with slight modifications. For the assessment year 1981-82, he filed monthly returns before the said officer and the assessment was not yet made by him. 3. While so, on 24th March, 1982, the 2nd respondent, Commercial Tax Officer No. II (Intelligence), Office of the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Hyderabad, inspected the business premises of the petitioner at Nellore and seized the stock in the mill premises of the petitioner and got the same scaled, and recorded his statement....
D.K.V. Prasada Rao and ors. Vs. Government of Andhra Pradesh
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-08-1983
Reported in: AIR1984AP75
Ramaswamy, J.1. These four writ petitions consisting of individual and juristic persons (Partnership Firms) and a lone lessee-licensees of cinema buildings (hereinafter called 'theatres') situation in West Godavari, Khammam, Nizambad and Mahboobnagar Districts are the petitioners. They invoked the constitutional remedy under Article 226 impugning 'the vires of R. 12 (3)' of the Andhra Pradesh Cinema (Regulation) Rules, (1970), hereinafter called 'the impugned Rule', mounting three pronged attack viz., infringement of their fundamental right to carry on trade or business in exhibiting cinematographs, on the anvil of (1) smack of statutory base, (2) excessive delegation and (3) unreasonable constraint in the exercise and enjoyment of their aforesaid right. Whether the base thus created on their four pillars (writ petitions) stand erected on solid foundation or shifting sand, is the subject of broach hereinafter. The reliefs claimed thereon are : (a) for declaration that the conferment of...
Government of Andhra Pradesh Vs. Durgaram Prasad
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-08-1983
Reported in: AIR1984AP14
Rama Rao, J. 1. The appellant is the petitioner-plaintiff. These appeal and Revision arise out of proceedings under Sections 30 and 33 of the Arbitration Act to set aside the award dated 31-3-1979 in the matter of arbitration pertaining to the disputes arising out of a contract No. 27/CFB/65 dated 22-5-1965 relating to the construction of Arts and Science College at Siddipet in Medak district and Sections 14 and 17 of the Arbitration Act to receive the award dated 31-3-1979 and make it rule of Court. The 1st respondent is a firm of contractors and in view of the disputes raised with regard to the contract the 2nd respondent was appointed as arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties. The arbitrator made and signed the award dated 31-3-1979 allowing certain claims in favour of the 1st respondent. The award was filed into court by the 1st respondent with a prayer that it may be made a rule of the Court and decree may be passed in terms of the award and the petition is file...
S. Nagendra and ors. Vs. Union Bank of India and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-05-1983
Reported in: (1984)ILLJ240AP
1. This batch of writ petitions raises service problem of promotion. It is enough if I state the facts in one case. 2. In W.P. No. 618 of 1981 it is averred in the affidavit that the petitioners are working as Grade II Officers in Union Bank of India and they are entitled to be promoted as Grade I Officers and the promotion of some of the Junior Officers in November, 1979 and July, 1980 ignoring the seniority and merit of the petitioners was illegal. It is further averred in the petition that there is no policy laid down by the bank for effecting the promotions from Grade II to Grade I Officer and without any rule of uniformity and in utter violation of seniority, merit and job responsibility and other determinative factors the promotions were made. In fact, one S. Sadasivan who ranks 165 in seniority list was promoted ignoring the merit and Seniority of the petitioners. It is averred that the present promotional policy is violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India an...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »