Andhra Pradesh Court January 1989 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.
State of Andhra Pradesh Vs. Sharma Traders
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-25-1989
Reported in: [1989]73STC193(AP)
V. Neeladri Rao, J.1. For the assessment year 1977-78, the Commercial Tax Officer granted exemption in regard to the turnover of Rs. 1,95,516.42 in regard to the disputed turnover under section 6(2) of the Central Sales Tax Act even though E-I forms were not produced. Then the Deputy Commissioner (CT), Visakhapatnam, in Rc. 1340/80-A8 dated 15th June, 1981 revised the said order under section 20(2) by holding that it is exigible to tax as E-I forms were not produced. Then the assessee produced E-I forms before the Assistant Commercial Tax Officer. The Appellate Tribunal held that as the order of the assessing authority was revised by the Deputy Commissioner (CT), it is not for the Assistant Commercial Tax Officer to consider the same. Hence the matter was remitted to the Deputy Commissioner to consider the E-I forms filed by the assessee.2. By referring to rule 12(7) of the Central Sales Tax (Registration and Turnover) Rules, 1967, the learned Government Pleader urged that an assessee ...
The New India Assurance Company Ltd. Vs. Anasurya and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-25-1989
Reported in: I(1991)ACC168
K. Ramaswamy, J.1. An interesting question of law has been raised by Shri Somayajulu the learned Counsel for the Insurance Company. Namely, whether the insurer is liable to pay compensation for the death of or bodily injury to persons travelling in a tractor-cum-trailer insured under the contract of insurance with the appellant-company? The admitted facts are that Ram Reddy, the 6th respondents the owner of the tractor and trailer APM 3601 and APM 3602. He has employed the 5th respondent Ramulu as their driver. On October, 22, 1985, when the tractor-cum-trailer was transporting the sand to the field of the owner from a vagu after loading the sand for which the deceased Anjaneyulu and Ors. were engaged as labourers to load and unload the sand, due to the negligent driving of the 5th respondent, the deceased fell down from the tractor at the turning of the road. The tyres of the vehicle passed over him due to which he died. Respondents 1 to 4, the widow, the minor daughter and the parent...
G. Yadagiri Reddy and ors. Vs. Government of Andhra Pradesh, Represent ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-25-1989
Reported in: 1991(3)ALT69
ORDERSyed Shah Mohammed Quadri, J.1. In these writ petitions, notifications dt. 11-9-87 issued by the Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad, the third respondent, under Section 3 (2) of the Andhra Pradesh Slum Improvement (Acquisition of Land), Act, Act No. XXXIII of 1956 (for short 'the Act') are challenged. W.P. Nos. 16075, 17100 and 4890/87 , relate to acquisition of the slum known as 'Gangidi Yellareddy Compound' (for short 'G.Y. Compound'), Zeera, Secunderabad. W.P.Nos. 15330, 16202 and 17869/87 relate to acquisition of the slum known as Unnikota, Kavadiguda. As the facts in all the W.Ps. are common, it would be sufficient to refer to the facts as stated in the affidavit accompanying W.P.No. 16075/87.2. The petitioners in the said writ petition are claiming to be owners of houses bearing Municipal Number 6-6-252 to 254, Zeera, Secunderabad on the basis of the partition deed dated 1-7-1972. According to them, the houses in question are their ancestral properties. They are paying munic...
K. Abdul Malik Vs. D. Shama Vali and Others
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-24-1989
Reported in: AIR1990AP93
ORDER1. The case of the revisionist herein is that the respondents had filed a civil suit during vacation before the Vacation Civil Judge, Kurnool, and obtained a temporary injunction. After vacation, the matter came up before the District Munsif, on the application made by the revisionist to vacate the injunction and the same was done by the Dist. Munsif. Consequently an appeal was preferred to the learned Subordinate Judge, Adoni, whd held that the District Munsif had no jurisdiction to vacate the injunction granted by the Vacation on Civil Judge, Kurnool. The error is quite apparent. Inasmuch as during the vacation it was certainly competent for the vacation civil Judge to grant a temporary injunction for the vacation period which, he did, and latter transmitted the record back to the Court of competent jurisdiction, namely the District Munsif, Adoni. Therefore, for all practical purposes, the order passed by the Vacation Civil Judge must be deemed to have been made by the District ...
Magadri Satyanarayana Vs. B. Jayaramarao and Others
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-24-1989
Reported in: 1990ACJ997; AIR1990AP160
1. The appellant is the claimant. The Tribunal below dismissed the Original Petition against all the respondents viz., the 1st respondent owner of the vehicle, the driver 2nd respondent and the Insurance Company, 3rd respondent. In this appeal unfortunately respondents 1 and 2 i.e., the owner and the Driver have not been im-pleaded stating that they are not necessary parties, as they remained ex parte in the Lower Court. Notice is only taken out to the 3rd respondent Insurance Company which was served. When I pointed out how a decree can be considered on merits in the absence of the insured the 1st respondent owner of the vehicle, the learned counsel for the appellant placed reliance on O. 41, R. 14(4), C.P.C. and contended that since they remained ex partle in the tribunal below it is not necessary to take out notices to them. Therefore, the appeal can be considered on merits as against the Insurance Company and the matter be remanded to the tribunal for reconsideration afresh. I find...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Bajrang Lal
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-24-1989
Reported in: [1989]176ITR334(AP)
B.P. Jeevan Reddy, J.1. The Income-tax Tribunal, Hyderabad, has stated the following questions for our opinion under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the interest amounts received by the minors, Master Sanjay Kumar and Master Manoj Kumar, are not includible under section 64(1)(iii) in the income of the assessee, Sri Bajranglal (father of the minors), for the assessment year 1976-77 ?' 2. Jagdish Prasad and his brother, Musaddilal, constituted a partnership firm, Jagdish Prasad Co. One Bajranglal is the assessee herein. In 1970, his elder son by name, Sanjay Kumar brought in a sum of Rs. 10,000 into the partnership. Four years later, the other son of Bajranglal, Master Manoj Kumar, was also admitted to the benefits of the partnership. A similar Sum of Rs. 10,000 was brought in by Master Manoj Kumar on the occassion of his admission. When Sanjay Kumar was admitted, a deed of partnership was executed. For the assessment ye...
State of Andhra Pradesh Vs. Garlapati Hanumantha Rao and Company
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-24-1989
Reported in: [1989]75STC300(AP)
B.P. Jeevan Reddy, J.1. This tax revision case is preferred by the State against the judgment of the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal in Tribunal Appeal No. 38 of 1979. Only one question is urged before us. It was considered as question No. 2 by the Tribunal. We shall, therefore, state the facts only in so far as the said question is concerned. 2. The respondent-dealer was finally assessed under the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act by the Commercial Tax Officer, Nellore, for the assessment year 1973-74 on a net turnover of Rs. 4,46,811.19. An appeal was preferred by the dealer questioning, inter alia, the levy of tax on a turnover of Rs. 72,850.46. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner set aside the assessment with respect to the above turnover. Thereupon, the Deputy Commissioner in exercise of his suo motu powers of revision under sub-section (2) of section 20 revised the said appellate order in so far as it held that the turnover in a sum of Rs. 72,850.46 is not exigible to tax. The d...
State of Andhra Pradesh Vs. Glimmer Exports
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-24-1989
Reported in: [1990]76STC208(AP)
B.P. Jeevan Reddy, J.1. Mica is taxable at the point of purchase by the last dealer who buys in the State at the rate of 3 per cent. The respondent is a dealer in mica. He submitted a return for the assessment year 1971-72, showing a gross turnover of Rs. 1,55,661.50. Out of it he claimed exemption in respect of Rs. 153.65, the balance being shown as net turnover. The Deputy Commercial Tax Officer accepted the turnover, but his order was revised by the Deputy Commissioner under section 20(2) of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957. The Deputy Commissioner observed that the Deputy Commissioner Tax Officer did not take the opening and closing stock into consideration while arriving at the net turnover and that neither the assessment order nor the assessment record showed the details for arriving at the last purchase turnover. He directed that the assessing authority had to compute the purchase turnover of the inter-State sales and foreign sales which become the last purchase tu...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Ampro Food Products
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-23-1989
Reported in: [1991]191ITR695(AP)
B.P. Jeevan Reddy, J.(1) The following question are referred for our opinion under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act) : '1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal is right in law in holding that the expenditure of Rs. 1,24,091 incurred for the purpose of distributing free note books and expenditure of Rs. 1,08,565 incurred for placing gift coupons in the assessee's products, , biscuit tins, in order to promote sales are not covered by section 37(3A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal, is right in law in directing that the expenditure of Rs. 2,32,656 on note books and gift coupons should be allowed in full under section 37(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?' (2) The Income-tax Officer and the Appellate Assistant Commissioner treated the said expenditure on note books and gift coupons as an expenditure incurred by the assessee by way of sales promoti...
Sri Ramakrishna Tobacco Co. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-23-1989
Reported in: [1989]176ITR108(AP)
B.P. Jeevan Reddy, J.1. The question sought to be referred herein is : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the honourable Income-tax Tribunal is justified in sustaining the addition by revaluing the closing stock at market price when a partner in a firm died and the business is run by the firm reconstituted on the death of the partner taking over assets and liabilities ?' 2. What happened is this : because of the death of a partner on November 2, 1983, the partnership stood dissolved. A new partnership wasentered into on the next day by the surviving partners. The legal representatives of the deceased partner were paid off. In the assessment proceedings for the assessment year 1984-85, two assessments were made, one on the previous firm up to November 2, 1983, and the other on the succeeding firm. (This is not a case of reconstitution - it is only a case where the business is succeeded to by a new firm). In the circumstances, the authorities were perfectly just...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »