Andhra Pradesh Court August 1988 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.
M/S. Police Uniform Production Centre Vs. the Director General and Ins ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-12-1988
Reported in: AIR1990AP9
ORDERYogeshwar Dayal, C.J. 1.This writ appeal is directed against the judgment of the learned single Judge dt. 15-2-1988 dismissing the writ petition filed by the appellant against an order dt. 22-12-87 passed by the Director General and Inspector General of Police, A.P. Hyderabad.2. The appellant firm is one M/s. Police Uniform Production Centre, situated at 21-4-1985 Gulab Singh Lane, Hyderabad, carrying on the business and supplying the Police Uniforms and webbing to the Police Department. As per the appellant Mohd. Yousuf, son of Mohd. Mehtab, who is the proprietor of this concern by the impugned order dt. 22-12-1987, the petitioner concern M/s. Police Uniform Production Centre, Hyderabad has been blacklisted by the Police Department.3. Before the passing of the impugned order it appears that by an order dt. 8-10-87 the petitioner was blacklisted earlier along with several other firms. The petitioner challenged the said order of 8-10-87 by way of W.P. No. 15581/87 in this Court and...
Panama Petroleum Products Vs. Appellate Deputy Commissioner (Commercia ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-12-1988
Reported in: [1990]76STC280(AP)
Yogeshwar Dayal, C.J. 1. Heard both the counsel, viz., Sri B. A. Padmanabha Rao, counsel for the petitioner and Sri A. Venkataramana, Government Pleader. 2. This writ petition is directed against an order dated 9th August, 1988, passed by the Appellate Deputy Commissioner (Commercial Taxes), Punjagutta Division, Hyderabad, dismissing an application for stay filed before it on the ground that since there is no provision in the A.P. General Sales Tax Act, 1957, it has no powers to stay the auction proceedings. 3. The appeal before the appellate authority arose in the following circumstances. In purported exercise of powers under section 28, sub-section (6) of the aforesaid Act, the Commercial Tax Officer (Int.) No. V, Central Enforcement Wing, A.P., Hyderabad, passed an order dated 30th July, 1988, whereby the learned Commercial Tax Officer held that there was a deliberate attempt to evade tax in relation to bringing to Andhra Pradesh from Bombay 15 drums of lube oil valued at Rs. 16,380...
Balajee Purushottam Vs. Commercial Tax Officer, Begum Bazar Circle, Hy ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-10-1988
Reported in: [1992]86STC463(AP)
M.N. Rao, J.1. The petitioner, a registered dealer in kirana goods, is seeking a writ of certiorari to call for the records pertaining to the assessment order made by the 1st respondent, Commercial Tax Officer, Begum Bazar Circle, Hyderabad, in G.I. No. 8027/83-84 dated August 7, 1984 and quash the same. 2. In respect of the assessment year 1983-84, the petitioner submitted books of accounts. On examining the same, the assessing authority found that in respect of the turnover pertaining to the commodity copra, which is liable to tax at the point of last purchase in this State, the names and particulars of the dealers (purchasers) mentioned in the books of accounts were fictitious, which conclusion was reached after an enquiry and, therefore, a show cause notice was issued to the petitioner calling upon him to show cause why the exemption claimed by the assessee in respect of tax the turnover pertaining to copra should not be rejected. In his objections, the petitioner contended that it...
National thermal Power Corporation Ltd. Vs. Bhanu Construction Co. P. ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-08-1988
Reported in: AIR1989AP140; [1991]72CompCas247(AP)
Jeevan Reddy, J. 1. This Writ Appeal is preferred by the 1st respondent in W.P. No. 20019/87, against the judgment of the learned single Judge allowing the writ petition. For the sake of convenience we shall refer to the parties with reference to their ranking in the writ petition.2. The petitioner-company, 'Bhanu Construction Company (Private) Ltd.', is engaged in the business of fabrication and construction of Transmission Towers, laying of transmission lines, and other similar works. It was awarded three works by the National Thermal Power Corporation Ltd., (1st respondent in the writ petition and appellant in this Writ Appeal), the particulars whereof are : --(i) laying of transmission line over a length of 220 Kilometres from Cuddapah to Bangalore, valued at Rs. 360 Lakhs awarded on 31-3-1982; (ii) laying of transmission line between Cuddapah and Madras (Cuddapah Red Hills), over a length of 110 Kilometres, valued at Rs. 370 Lakhs awarded on 25-7-1983; and (iii) laying of transmi...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Chitra Kalpa
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-05-1988
Reported in: [1989]177ITR540(AP)
Jeevan Reddy, J. 1. I agree with the answer proposed by my learned brother, Y. V. Anjaneyulu J. (printed below) but for a different reason. I agree with the Tribunal that the subsidy granted by the Government in terms of G.O. Ms. No. 1290 dated December 31, 1971, was granted for producing a capital asset - a firm is a capital asset in the hands of the producer - and, therefore, the true character of the receipts in the hands of the assessee was on capital account, the Tribunal's finding is that the subsidy is granted 'for the production of the assets'. I agree that that is the dominant purpose of the G.O. The subsidy is meant for defraying partly the cost of production of films produced in Andhra pradesh. The several requirements of the G.O. - detailed in the order of my learned brother - all pertain to the stage of production, one this is so, the decision of this court in CIT v. Sahney Steel and Press Works Ltd. : [1985]152ITR39(AP) , becomes clearly distinguishable. That was a case w...
State of Andhra Pradesh Vs. Bhramaramba Mallikarjuna Swamy Devasthanam
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-05-1988
Reported in: [1989]73STC321(AP)
Seetharam Reddy, J.1. Sri Bhramaramba Mallikarjuna Swamy Devasthanam, Srisailam, which is one of the most prominent Hindu religious temples in the State, is the respondent herein and the State has come in revision aggrieved against the order made by the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, setting aside the order made by the Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes confirming the order of the Commercial Tax Officer, holding that the said Devasthanam cannot be said to be a 'dealer' within the meaning of section 2(1)(e) of the Andhra Pradesh General sales Tax Act (for short 'the Act'). The three items in respect of which the sales tax was sought to be levied are : (a) Sales of food and drink in the canteens run by Devasthanam during the assessment years in question which are for six years from 1970-71 to 1975-76 and also purchase of paddy for running the canteens. (b) Sales of motor parts as scrap. (c) Sales of human hair. 2. The contentions advanced on behalf of the revisionist herein by t...
Vinayak Beer and Wine Stores Vs. Commercial Tax Officer, Narayanaguda ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-03-1988
Reported in: [1989]75STC344(AP)
Yogeshwar Dayal, C.J.1. This writ petition under article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed for a mandamus being issued directing the respondent to refund the tax paid on the disputed turnover immediately with interest. 2. We have given notice to the respondent to show cause as to why this writ petition should not be admitted and the counter-affidavit was directed to be filed by 1st August, 1988. But no counter-affidavit has been filed. With the consent of both the parties, the main writ petition is being disposed of. 3. For the assessment year 1984-85, the petitioner was assessed to tax on gross and net turnovers. The turnover of Rs. 45,15,792.34 relating to liquor and Rs. 4,85,431.46 relating to beer which were shown as stock transfers from wholesale to retail account of the petitioner were assessed to tax at 25 1/2 per cent + surcharge and 10 1/2 per cent + surcharge respectively for liquor and beer, treating the same as sales. Aggrieved by the aforesaid assessment orde...
S. Thippaswami Vs. Silamatam Vanajamma and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-02-1988
Reported in: 1991(1)ALT290
ORDERG. Radhakrishna Rao, J.1. Respondents 1 and 2 are wife and son of the petitioner. They filed a petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C. for maintenance before the Magistrate. The Magistrate granted maintenance at the rate of Rs. 250/- to the wife and Rs. 200/- to the son, payable from 3-10-1983. As the husband failed to pay any amount and as the total amount was Rs. 9,225/-, the wife and son filed Crl. M.P. No. 22/86. Notice was issued to the husband and later non-bailable warrant also was issued to the husband, but it was recalled. The husband filed a counter, admitting the amount but contended that under Section 125(3) Cr.P.C. the petition is barred by time and no warrant can be issued for the recovery of the amount. He also contended that he has no ready means to pay the arrears.2. Before filing the petition, the wife and son filed Crl. M.P. No. 227/85 on 18-3-1985 for realisation of the maintenance and it was dismissed for default on 22-7-1985 for non-prosecution. Another Crl. M.P. ...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Hotels (Andhra) P. Ltd.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-01-1988
Reported in: [1989]175ITR295(AP)
Seetharama Reddy, J. 1. It is unfortunate that the question referred to us by the Appellate Tribunal at the instance of the Revenue ought not to have arisen at all, because the circumstances that led to this reference are both amusing as well as amazing. The question referred for our answer is : 'Whether, on the fact and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal is justified in holding that the assessee is entitled to the benefit of the allowances under sections 32(1)(v) and 33(1)(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?' 2. The question to be answered becomes very easy if the correspondence that ensued between the assessee and the Department of Tourism is carefully gone through and thus a reference could have been avoided. The assessee is a hotel, 'Sun-n-Sea', established at Visakhapatnam for which approval was sought for from the Department of Tourism, which was accorded on November 6, 1965, stating 'your hotel project is approved by the Government'. It is further clarified by...
Vinod Solvent Extracts (P) Ltd. Vs. the State of Andhra Pradesh
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-01-1988
Reported in: [1989]73STC175(AP)
M.N. Rao, J. 1. These three revision petitions are interconnected, in that they raise a common question of law and so they are disposed of by this common judgment. 2. The only question that falls for our consideration in these revision petitions is whether the Central sales tax on tapioca powder sold by the petitioner-assessee during the years 1978-79, 1979-80 and 1980-81 was not leviable by virtue of section 8(2-A) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 In other words whether the petitioner-assessee is not liable to pay the Central sales tax for the three assessment years in question. 3. Tapioca is liable to tax at the point of last purchase in this State at 4 per cent as per entry 20 of the Second Schedule to the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act. Section 9 of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act confers power on the State Government to notify exemptions and deductions of tax. In exercise of the power conferred under section 9(1) the State Government issued G.O.Ms. No. 930, Revenu...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›