Andhra Pradesh Court June 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.
Commissioner of Income-tax, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad Vs. Warner Hindu ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-30-1983
Reported in: [1985]151ITR701(AP)
Punnayya, J.1. The Commissioner of Income-tax filed a petition under s. 256(2) of the I.T. Act requesting this court to direct the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal to make a reference to this court questions of Nos. 1 to 3, 9 and 10. 2. The learned counsel on both sides submitted before us that questions Nos. 1 to 3 are covered by the decision of this court in Income-tax Case No. 64 of 1982, dated December 29, 1982 [CIT v. Warner Hindustan Ltd. : [1984]145ITR24(AP) ]. Since it is covered by the aforesaid decision, we decline to refer questions Nos. 1 to 3. 3. Regarding question No. 9, the devaluation took place on June 6, 1966, and the assessment in question came up for consideration in 1972-73. It is, therefore, clear that four years prior to the assessment order, the machinery was purchased by the assessee at the devaluation rate and its value was ascertained and accepted by the Department. During these four years depreciation is being worked on the basis of ascertained cost. In the cir...
Commissioner of Income-tax, Andhra Pradesh Vs. Visakhapatnam Port Trus ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-17-1983
Reported in: (1984)38CTR(AP)1; [1983]144ITR146(AP)
Jagannadha Rao, J.1. Questions relating to the interpretation of International Tax Agreements containing international tax language fall for consideration in this reference. 2. The question of law referred to us at the instance of the Commissioner of Income-tax, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad, is as follows : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances if the case, the assessee is immune from liability either wholly or partly to tax on the basis of the Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement between Germany and India?' 3. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad, has consolidated 21 reference applications as common question are involved and it has drawn up a single reference application. 4. The assessee is the Visakhapatnam Port Trust (hereinafter called the 'Port Trust'). The Port Trust is under the Ministry of Shipping and Transport, Govt. of India. The Visakhapatnam Port exports a large amount of iron ore. In order to speed up the export operations, the Port Trust felt it necessary t...
Jatti Krishnareddy Vs. Bhadri Ramagopalaiah
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-17-1983
Reported in: AIR1985AP49
ORDER1. The question that arises for consideration in this civil revision petition is whether the execution Court has power to direct payment of decretal amount by instalments. 2. The petitioner herein who is the judgment debtor filed a petition under S. 47 C.P.C. for a direction to pay the decretal amount in five equal annual instalments. On an objection raised by the office as to maintainability of the petition, the matter was heard by the learned Subordinate Judge and an order was passed on Feb. 8, 1983 holding that the petition is not maintainable. The learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to the provisions of O.20, R.11, C.P.C. and S. 47, r/w S. 151, C.P.C. and submitted that an executing Court has got the power to direct payment of decretal amount in instalments and that such an order does not amount to alteration or modification of the decree. O.20, R.11, C.P.C. reads as follows.O. 20, R.11.: Decree may direct payment by instalments: (1) Where and in so far, as a decre...
Tirumalesa Sugars, Palakol Vs. Government of India and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-15-1983
Reported in: 1985(21)ELT71(AP)
1. M/s. Tirumalesa Sugars, Palakol, applied for an ex-gratia refund of Rs. 16,013.31 Ps. being the differential duty between ad valorem rate of duty paid by them and revised compounded levy rate during the period from 1-3-1975 to 29-4-1975 on Khandasari sugar. The Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Rajahmundry, by his order dated 30-6-1976 rejected the claim for refund. The order of the Assistant Collector, Central Excise was served on Tirumalesa Sugars, the petitioner in this writ petition on 18-8-1976. Against the said order, the petitioner preferred an appeal to the Collector of Central Excise, Madras on 16-11-1976. The appeal was received by the Appellate Collector of Central Excise on 22-11-1976. The Appellate Collector of Central Excise rejected the appeal of the petitioner on the ground that the appeal was barred by time under Section 35 of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944. A further revision preferred by the petitioner to the Government of India was also unsuccessful....
Coromandel Fertilizers Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-10-1983
Reported in: (1984)39CTR(AP)210; [1984]148ITR546(AP)
Madhava Reddy, C.J.1. The assessee is a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956, with its registered office at Secunderabad in Andhra Pradesh, whose main object is manufacture of fertilizers in India. EDI Parry Ltd., a company incorporated under the English Companies Act and having its registered office in London, is one of the largest manufacturers and distributors of fertilizers of various types in India for the last sixty years and had conducted extensive agronomical research and acquired in India unrivalled knowledge and experience of agronomy, agricultural practices and soil formations and chemical compositions, cropping patterns, particularly applicable to South India. The assessee-company, being desirous of obtaining from EID Parry the said know-how for promoting the sale of fertilizers manufactured by it, entered into an agreement with EID Parry Ltd. On April 16, 1964. The important features of this agreement, among others, are as follows : '(5) EID has agreed to imp...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›