Andhra Pradesh Court October 1984 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.
Standard Packagings and ors. Vs. Union of India Overruled
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-25-1984
Reported in: 1985(4)ECC299; 1985(20)ELT314(AP)
Jeevan Reddy, J.1. A common question arises in this Writ Appeal and the writ petition, viz., whether bituminised water proof paper produced by the petitioners is liable to excise duty under Tariff Item 17(2) of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944. Bituminised water-proof paper is prepared by coating one side of the kraft paper with bitumin, to make it more durable and strong for the purpose of packaging. Sometimes, two kraft paper are bonded together with bitumin. It is admitted that the kraft paper used for the purpose, has already suffered duty, and so has the bitumin used for the purpose. The question is, whether the bituminised waterproof paper produced by the petitioners is a new commodity, and liable to duty afresh In other words, the question is whether the process employed for preparing bituminised water-proof paper, involves 'manufacture' It is the common case of both the parties before us that, unless the process employed by the petitioners amounts to 'manufacture' no duty...
B. Rajendra Oil Mills and Refinery Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-25-1984
Reported in: 1985(5)ECC7; 1985LC346(AP); 1993LC333(AP)
B.P. Jeevan Reddy, J.1. This writ petition is directed against the order of the Government of India in a revision petition filed by the petitioner. The petitioner is Messrs. Rajendra Oil Mills and Refinery, Hyderabad. It is engaged in the manufacture of 'industrial hard oil', which is used as a raw material in the manufacture of soaps. The petitioner says that the 'industrial hard oil' is manufactured out of raw castor oil, and that the 'industrial hard oil' is popularly known as 'vegetable tallow' or 'hard lumps', but that it is not known as 'processed vegetable non-essential oil' in the market. The petitioner says that the raw castor oil is subjected to a process of clarification and then hydro-genated at a melting point over and above 45 degrees and converted into hard lumps, which are unfit for human consumption. According to the petitioner this 'industrial hard oil' or 'hard lumps', as it may be called, is not dutiable under any of the provisions of the Central Excises and Salt Ac...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Raj Brothers
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-22-1984
Reported in: [1986]158ITR831(AP)
Anjaneyulu, J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal referred a batch of cases concerning the interpretation of the provision of section 187 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. 2. The assessee is a partnership firm. One of the partners died during the accounting year relevant to the assessment year under consideration. The assessee claimed that on the death of the partner, there is a dissolution of the partnership firm under section 42(c) of the Indian Partnership Act, inasmuch as the partnership deed executed between the partners did not contain an agreement to the contrary. The assessee, therefore, claimed that two separate assessments should be made - one relating to the period up to the death of the partner and the other relating to the period commencing after the death of the partner to the end of the accounting year. 3. Incomes for the two periods were separately ascertained and two separate returns were filed for the two periods. The Revenue rejected the contention that there was a disso...
Sri Satyanarayana Rice Mill Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-22-1984
Reported in: (1985)49CTR(AP)275; [1985]155ITR676(AP)
Raghuvir, J. 1. This reference is made under sub-s. (1) of s. 256 of the I.T. Act, 1961 (the Act). The assessee in this case is a firm which runs its business in the name and style of M/s. Satyanarayana Rice Mill, Amadalavalasa (the miller). The reference in the case arose in the following circumstances : In exercise of the powers under the Essential Commodities Act (10 of 1955) the State of Andhra Pradesh promulgated on November 17, 1967, an order known as 'Rice Procurement (Levy) and Restriction on Sale Order, 1967'. Under the order, rice-millers in the state were obliged to deliver a specified quantity of their turnover as levy rice to the Food Corporation of India-the agent of the State. The miller (assessee), defaulted to deliver the levy relevant to the period between November 1, 1972, and February 23, 1973. Thereupon, a specified quantity of rice was seized from the miller and subsequently, after an enquiry, under Act 10 of 1955, the seized rice was confiscated. The value of the...
S. Sreenivasa Jaideep and anr. Vs. the Registrar, Andhra University, W ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-22-1984
Reported in: AIR1985AP81
ORDER1. These two petitioners are seeking admission into the Andhra University College of Engineering, Waltair against the quota of seats reserved for the children of the University employees. Admission to the Andhra University College of Engineering is based upon the marks obtained by the aspirants at the common entrance examination conducted by the Universities in Andhra Pradesh. These petitioners along with others had appeared for the common entrance examination and secured each 44 out of 150 marks. This was the same number of marks which one Nanda Kishore had secured. The petitioners allege that on the basis of these marks they, as well as Nanda Kishore, applied for admission into the above collect under the quota of 16 seats reserved for the childing of the staff working in the Andhra University. Clause 4(D)(6) of the College prospectus issued by the Andhra University Engineering College for the year 1983-84 entitles the children of the teaching and non-teaching staff working in t...
Commissioner of Income-tax, Visakhapatnam Vs. G. Gopal Rao and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-17-1984
Reported in: (1985)46CTR(AP)38; [1985]151ITR308(AP)
Anjaneyulu, J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal referred under s. 256(1) of the I.T. Act 1961 ('the Act' for short), a batch of cases involving a common point for the opinion of this court. The question involved in each of these cases relates to the interpretation of the provisions of s. 64(1)(iii) of the Act. The question canvassed for our consideration in all these references is the correctness of the ITO's view that the income arising to a minor child of an individual from the admission of such minor to the benefits of partnership in a firm could be include in computing the total income of the individual, even if such individual did not individually derive income from any source which is liable to be taxed under the Act. Referring to the facts in the present case, it would appear that the assessee, whose status is that of an individual for the purpose of assessment, did not derive income from any source liable to be taxed under the Act for the income-tax assessment year 1976-77. ...
Batta Kalyani Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-15-1984
Reported in: (1985)46CTR(AP)45; [1985]154ITR59(AP)
Anjaneyulu, J.1. The following question of law has been referred this court by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal under s. 256(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act') : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal is justified in holding that the income of the assessee's husband is includible in the assessment of the assessee under s. 64(1)(ii) of the Act ?' 2. This reference relates to the income-tax assessment year 1976-77. The assessee, Smt. Batta Kalyani, runs a hardware and paint shops. She employed her husband, B. Venkataramaiah, to manage the business paid him salary for services rendered. There is no dispute that the business is carried on by the assessee as a sole proprietrix. The ITO included in the total income of the assessee, the salary paid by the assessee to her husband by applying the provisions of s. 64(1)(ii) of the Act. It may be relevant to extract the same : '(1) In computing the total income of any individual, there sha...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Coromandel Fertilisers Ltd.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-13-1984
Reported in: [1991]187ITR673(AP)
Y.N. Anjaneyulu, J.1. This reference arises under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act' for short), in connection with the income-tax assessment years 1972-73, 1973-74 and 1974-75. The assessee is a company. The company secured the services of one Mr. Larner with the approval of the Central Government as a foreign technician subject to the provisions contained in section 10(6)(vii-a) of the Act. The Central Government conveyed its approval to the contract of Mr. Larner's service in India, as required by section 10(6)(vii-a)(2) of the Act, consequently, salary to the extent of Rs. 4,000 paid to Mr. Larner is wholly exempt from income-tax. Income-tax is, however, payable on the amount in excess of Rs. 4,000 paid to Mr. Larner but that liability to pay tax is that of the company in accordance with the contract of service approved by the Central Government. Mr. Larner himself is not under an obligation to pay any tax under the Income-tax Act on the salary paid to him whethe...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. T.V. Ramanaiah and Sons
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-10-1984
Reported in: [1986]157ITR300(AP)
Y.V. Anjaneyulu, J. 1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal referred the following question of law under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the opinion of this court :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in law in holding that the net interest payable to the partners by the firm, i.e., the interest payable to the partners after deducting therefrom the interest due by the partners to the firm on their borrowings was the only amount to be disallowed under Section 40(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?'2. A narrow controversy arose in this case as regards the extent of interest which fell to be disallowed under Section 40(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act'). The assessee is a partnership firm. Some of the partners invested capital and were paid interest by the assessee-firm. These partners also borrowed monies from the partnership firm and paid interest to the assessee. In the computation of income of the assessee-fi...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. M.V. Krishnaiah and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-09-1984
Reported in: [1986]157ITR257(AP)
Upendra Lal Waghray, J.1. This is a reference under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, made at the instance of the Revenue by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad, in which the following question is referred for the opinion of this court : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the entries in the day book on August 4, 1973, coupled with the partnership deed dated December 16, 1970, would constitute an instrument of partnership as required under section 184 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?' 2. The facts necessary for appreciating the contentions of the parties are as follows : By a deed of partnership dated December 16, 1970, four partners were carrying on business. The accounts of the firm are to be closed by the end of December each year, that is, the accounting year is the calendar year. The partnership was registered under the provisions of the Indian Partnership Act and registration was also granted by the Income-tax Officer under section 185 of ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »