Andhra Pradesh Court June 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.
G. Narayana Sawamy Vs. Government of Andhra Pradesh and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-29-1984
Reported in: AIR1985AP225
K. Ramachandra Rao, C.J. 1. This appeal against the order o our learned brother Raghuvir, J. is concerned with the no-confidence motion against the Chairman, Dharmavaram Municipal Council. The appellant herein is the petitioner in the writ petition. The writ petition is filed for issue of a writ of mandamus declaring that the resolution expressing no-confidence against Sri G. Pradasaradhi, Chairman of the Dharmavaram Municipality is null and void. 2. The essential averments in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition may be stated. The appellant petitioner is a Councillor of Darmavaram Municipality and the Municipal Council comprises twenty four members. Regarding the no-confidence motion proposed to be discussed on 8-12-1983, the Chairman filed writ petition, being W.P. No. 10986/83 questioning the validity of the said motion and this Court in Writ Petition Misc. Petition 15080/83 issued a direction that the meeting should go on and the result should not be announced pendin...
Bhadrachalam Paper Boards Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise, Hydera ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-27-1984
Reported in: 1985(4)ECC318; 1984(18)ELT229(AP)
Jeevan Reddy, J.1. This is a reference under Section 35-G of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944. The assessee is a public limited company engaged in the manufacture of different varieties ofo paper and paper for captive consumption exclusively. Central Excise duty is ppaid on the wrapping paper manufactured by the applicant. Thereafter, it is used for wrapping other varieties of paper and paper boards for cnvenient distribution of these products. The assessee made an application to the Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Warangal Division for permission to avail of proforma credit under the provisions of Rule 56-A of Central Excise Rules, 1944 in respect of the duty initially paid in respect of the wrapping paper. The plea was rejected by the Assistant Collector. On appeal, the Appeellate Collector and remanded the matter for de novo disposal. On this occasion again the Assistant Collector held that the wrapping paper used for packing other varieties of paper in the applicant's ...
Commissioner of Income-tax, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad Vs. AutofIn Limi ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-25-1984
Reported in: [1985]151ITR741(AP)
Jeevan Reddy, J. 1. The only question referred is 'whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the travelling expenses incurred by the managing director of the assessee company are exempt from the purview of rule 6D of the I.T. Rules, 1962, in view of Circular No. 2(44)-CL-VII/74, dt. 1-2-75 of the Ministry of Law, Justice and Company Affairs ?' Though the Department asked for three other questions to be referred, the Tribunal thought it fit to refer only the above question. We have no information whether any application under s. 256(2) has been made by the Department with respect of the refusal of the Tribunal to refer other questions and if so what the position is. In the circumstances, we have no option but to proceed to deal with and answer the question referred to us. 2. This matter came up for hearing on June 20, 1984, and after having been heard partly, we adjourned the case for today, because the learned counsel for the respondent-assessee was not present and al...
Government of Andhra Pradesh and anr. Vs. Bactchala Balaiah Overruled
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-25-1984
Reported in: AIR1985AP52
Punnayya, J. 1. The Revision and the C.M.A. arise out of the proceedings of Original Suit No. 124 of 1982. The brief facts leading to the revision and the C.M.A. are as follows: The plaintiff in the suit was a contractor. He entered into an agreement with defendants 1 and 2 who represent the State of Andhra Pradesh to do earth work over the embankment of Godavari South canal beyond lower Manair Dam. His tender was accepted and he completed the work as per the agreement. However, disputes arose between him and the defendants regarding the payment of the amounts for the work done by him. Both parties appointed defendants 3 to 5 as arbitrators to resolve the dispute. After due enquiry, defendants 3 to 5 passed an award on 15-8-1982 in favour of the contractor-plaintiff. Copies of the award were communicated to defendants 1 and 2 . But the Government did not pay the amount as per the award and hence the contract filed the suit in the Subordinate Judge's Court, Ongole, to make the award a r...
Commissioner of Income-tax, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad Vs. Hyderabad As ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-22-1984
Reported in: (1985)44CTR(AP)235; [1984]150ITR517(AP); [1984]19TAXMAN46(AP)
Amareswari, J. 1. The following question is referred for our opinion under s. 256(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961 : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the expenditure incurred by the assessee-company, viz., Rs. 5,04,799, for the assessment year 1970-71 is revenue in nature either in whole or ] part ?'2. The facts : The assessee, M/s. Hyderabad Asbestos Cement Products Ltd. Hyderabad is a limited company carrying on business of manufacturing asbestos cement products since several years. They were manufacturing ordinary pipes under what is known as Magnani process. They wanted to manufacture better type of pipes known as pressure pipes. For that purpose, they entered into a collaboration agreement dated December 30, 1964, with Johns-Manville Corporation, New York hereinafter called J-M. The object recited in the agreement is for the purpose of supplying technical knowhow for the manufacture of machine of the Mazza type as are in the commercial operation at J-M's plant ...
The State of Andhra Pradesh Vs. T.V. Sundaram Iyengar and Sons Ltd.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-21-1984
Reported in: [1987]65STC41(AP)
Jeevan Reddy, J.1. Two questions arise in this tax revision case. The first question is whether the discount paid by the assessee to its stockists is deductible from out of his turnover as per rule 6(a) of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Rules and the second question is whether the motor car bulbs fall within entry 1 or entry 37, as they stood at the relevant time of the First Schedule to the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act So far as the first question is concerned, the relevant facts are that the assessee was in the practice of allowing discount every year to its stockists on the total purchases made by them from the assessee. The stockists were given the discount not immediately on the making out of a bill, but at the end of the year when the accounts were settled. The contention of the department is that inasmuch as the discount is not paid as and the bill is made out or the goods sold, but at the end of the year, rule 6(a) of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Rules has...
The State Vs. N.V. Narsimhacharyulu
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-21-1984
Reported in: [1986]63STC232(AP)
Y.V. Anjaneyulu, J.1. This tax revision case is filed against the decision of the Tribunal for the assessment year 1976-77. The assessee supplied stone ballast to the South Central Railway. Prior to the year 1978 he was not an assessee or a registered dealer on the rolls of the department. He had never submitted any returns as he was not liable to pay tax. On the information obtained from the South Central Railway, Vijayawada, the Commercial Tax Officer, Vijayawada, assessed the appellant on the turnover of stone ballast supplied to the South Central Railway under section 14(3) of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act. Inasmuch as the assessee did not file a return voluntarily, the Commercial Tax Officer instituted proceedings for the levy of penalty under section 14(3). The assessee explained that he was not an assessee on the rolls of the department till the year 1978 and he was unfamiliar with the legal position that the turnover of stone ballast in this case could be treated as ...
Commissioner of Wealth-tax, Andhra Pradesh Vs. Mirza Mahmood Ali Baig
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-20-1984
Reported in: (1984)42CTR(AP)119; [1985]152ITR740(AP)
Anjaneyulu, J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal referred the following question of law under s. 27(1) of the W.T. Act, 1957, for the opinion of this court : 'Whether the Appellate Assistant Commissioner or the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has jurisdiction to entertain an appeal by virtue of s. 18(2B) of the Wealth-tax Act after the Commissioner of Wealth-tax passed an order under section 18(2A) declining to waive penalty ?' 2. For the wealth-tax assessment years 1964-65 to 1969-70 (both years inclusive), the assessee filed returns on December 30, 1970. The WTO completed the assessments on January 28, 1971, and initiated proceedings for the levy of penalty under s. 18(1)(a) of the W.t. Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') for the assessee's failure to file wealth-tax returns within the time allowed under s. 14(1) of the Act. While the proceedings for levy of penalty were pending before the WTO, the assessee filed a petition dated February 22, 1971, before the CWT praying that ...
Chirra Musala Reddy Vs. the Joint Collector, Prakasam District at Ongo ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-20-1984
Reported in: AIR1985AP6
ORDER1. The petitioner filed the writ petition for a writ of certiorari to quash the orders passed by the first respondent in his proceedings in D. Dis. No. 3424/83 dated Aug. 12, 1983. He claims that he is a holder of B. Form Licence issued in his favour of Sept. 30, 1977 and ever since, he has been exhibiting the cinematographs in Sri Lakshmi Theatre, Muthlapadu. He also applied for renewal for 1980-81, 1981-82 and 1982-83 and renewal was granted in his favour. He also applied for renewal for 1983-84 and by operation of the A.P. Cinemas (Regulation) Rules, 1970, for short 'the rules' R.13 (7) (b) the renewal shall be deemed to have been granted despite the transfer of the licence in the name of the third respondent. Under R.11 (d) of the Rules, a letter of consent in writing of the original licencee, whenever there is a transfer of title to the effect that he has no objection to the licence being transferred in the name of the transferee, is mandatory. Since the letter of written con...
Hyderabad Vanaspati Limited Vs. Income-tax Officer, Central Circle, Hy ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-19-1984
Reported in: [1985]152ITR1(AP)
Jeevan Reddy, J. 1. This a petition for the issuance of a writ of centiorari or other appropriate writ, order or direction quashing the approval accorded by the 2nd respondent, viz., the Commissioner of Income-tax, Karnataka (Central), Bangalore, under sub-s. (8) of s. 132 of the I.T. Act, 1961. The approval was accorded in the proceedings dated February 25, 1980. 2. Sub-section (1) of s. 132 of the Act empowers the officers specified therein to authorise any ITO or Assistant Director of Inspection to search the premises, etc., and seize the books of account or other relevant material therefrom, if he believes that a person summoned to produce the books has failed to do so. For the purpose of this case, it is unnecessary to examine or set out the ingredients or features of sub-s. (1) in any detail. The provisions relevant herein are sub-ss. (8) and (10), which read as follows : '(8) The books of account or other documents seized under sub-section (1) or sub-section (1A) shall not be re...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »