Andhra Pradesh Court February 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.
D.V.K. Kesava Raju Vs. S.R. Govinda Rajan and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-07-1989
Reported in: 1990CriLJ299
ORDER1. By order dt. August 26, 1988 this Court allowed Writ Petition No. 12164 of 1984 quashing the order of removal of the petitioner from service of the first respondent holding that the order is bereft of reasons and directed the respondents to consider the explanation submitted by the petitioner and to hear him before passing appropriate orders within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of the order. He filed Contempt Case No. 741 of 1988 alleging that despite his Counsel writing a letter to the first respondent on September 6, 1988 to comply with the order passed by this Court, followed by another letter dt. September 12, 1988 and a Telegram dt. September 14, 1988 evoked no response. Later, he was asked to, submit his explanation and accordingly he submitted his explanation and even thereafter took no action. 113 days had passed by from the date of respite of the order but the respondents passed no orders. Thereby, the first respondent committed willful disobedience o...
Andhra Pradesh Paper Mills Ltd. Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-07-1989
Reported in: [1999]112STC555(AP)
B.P. Jeevan Reddy, J.1. In these T. R. Cs. two questions are urged by Shri P. Venkatrama Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner-assessee. The first one relates to bill discounting charges. What happens is this : The agreement between the parties contemplates payment of consideration after a period of 45 days or 60 days, as the case may be. The parties also contemplate raising a hundi and collecting it through their bankers. The bank charges certain amount towards the services rendered by it in that connection which are called as 'bill discounting charges'. The question is whether these bill discounting charges must he included in the turnover of the assessee-vendor or not. It would be evident that these are not post-sale charges. The agreement itself contemplates paying the consideration after a certain interval and through the specified method which necessarily involves paying certain amount to the bank towards the services rendered by it. These charges are also included in the bil...
Revenue Divisional Officer-cum-land Acquisition Officer, Chittoor Vs. ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-06-1989
Reported in: AIR1990AP155
1. An extent of Ac. 3-34 cents were acquired by issuance of the notification under S. 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act (Act 1 of 1894) for short, 'the Act, on June 23, 1977 published in the Slate Gazette for the purpose of establishing an electrical sub-station. The Land Acquisition Officer determined the market value at Rs.7,500/-pcr acre. On reference under S. 18, the civil court confirmed the market value of the land but enhanced the market value regarding the trees. They are Rs.894/- and Rs. 13,108/-respcctively. As against the amount awarded for the trees, the appeal has been filed. The contention of Sri V. R. Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for the Board is that theTribunal below has committed grievous error in applying the capitalisation method in determining Ihc market value of the trees. This point is no longer res integra and is covered by a judgment of this Court reported in in G. Manikyam v. Dist. Social Welfare Officer, Eluru (LAO 1987(2) API J 60(SN)). This Court has cons...
G. Kamalakumari Vs. Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-06-1989
Reported in: AIR1990AP159
ORDER1. The impugned notice served upon the petitioner calling upon him to show cause within three days from the date of service thereof, as to why the objectionable structure should not be demolished for reasons set out therein, to say the least, causes any amount of hardship to the petitioner for two reasons. Firstly, there are no particulars of the so-called violations alleged to have been committed by the petitioner. Secondly, the opportunity given to the petitioner to show cause, is not at all reasonable as only three days' time was given to him. I, therefore, quash the impugned notice dated 3-7-1986. It is, however, open to the respondent to initiate action against the petitioner in accordance with law, after serving upon him a notice in writing setting out any violations alleged to have been committed by him and giving him a reasonable opportunty of six weeks to show cause.2. The writ petition is accordingly ordered. No costs. Advocate's fee Rs. 150/-3. Order accordingly....
Chitavalsah Jute Mills Vs. B.V. Rao
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-02-1989
Reported in: (1989)IILLJ76AP
1. Sri Bagadi Vykunta Rao was appointed by Willard India Limited, Calcutta as a Mechanical Maintenance Overseer on 8th November 1971 on a salary of Rs. 725/- per month. The Chittivasa Jute Mills, which forms a division of Willard India Limited, confirmed his services on 26th June 1972 with effect from 1st April 1972 fixing his salary at Rs. 765/- per month. Later on, Jute mills granted ad hoc increments to the Mechanical Maintenance Overseer. By the end of 1979, his salary was fixed at Rs. 1500/- per month. Alleging that his services were wrongly terminated by issuing a memo dated 9th February 1983 with immediate effect offering one month's salary in lieu of notice and that no explanation was called for from him and no enquiry was conducted, he filed O.S. No. 299 of 1983 on the file of Principal Subordinate Judge, Visakhapatnam seeking the reliefs of reinstatement in service, damages or compensation of Rs. 3,00,000/- and some others reliefs. He shall hereinafter be referred to as 'the ...
Dr. Pinnamaneni Narasimha Rao Vs. Gundavarau Jayaprakasu and Another
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-01-1989
Reported in: I(1990)ACC468; 1990ACJ350; AIR1990AP207
1. The two appeals and the cross-objections arise out of the judgment of the learned First Additional District Judge, Guntur In O. S. No.34 of 1969 granting a decree for Rs. 22,000/ - in favour of the plaintiff towards damages for performing tonsil-lectomy operation onthe plaintiff in a careless and negligent manner. The second defendant Dr. P. Narasimha Rao was the E.N.T. Surgeon who performed the tonsillectomy operation upon the plaintiff at the Government General Hospital, Guntur and the third defendant Dr. S. Shankar Rao was the Chief Anaesthetist of the Hospital who administered anaesthetics at the time of the operation. The first defendant is the Government of Andhra Pradesh represented by the District Collector, Guntur who according to the plaintiff is vicariously liable for the damages since the alleged act of negligence was committed by the defendants 2 and 3 in the course of discharging their duties as employees of the State Government.2. The plaintiff was a brilliant youngst...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. East Coast Marine Products (P.) Ltd. an ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-01-1989
Reported in: (1990)88CTR(AP)156; [1990]181ITR314(AP)
ORDER--In respect of matters not covered by appeal before Commissioner (A)Held:The doctrine of merger applies to income tax proceedings but the extent of its applicability depends onthe scope and the subject matter of the appeal and the decision rendered by the appellate authority. Matters whichare not covered by the appellate order are left untouched and to that extent, the ITO's assessment order survives permitting exercise of revisional jurisdiction by the Commissioner under s. 263. -- CIT v. K.L. Rajput (1987) 164 ITR 197 (MP) (FB) concurred with.-- Note : Legislature has since stepped in with a view to remove any controversy. It has introduced cl. (c) in the Explanation to s. 263. This Explanation introduced by the Taxation Laws (Amendment), Act, 1984, and amended by the Direct Tax Laws (Amendment) Act, 1987, though not applicable to the assessmentorder concerned herein, manifests the legislative intent. Income Tax Act 1961 s.263 ...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. HarbIn Singh
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-01-1989
Reported in: [1990]185ITR573(AP)
B.P. Jeevan Reddy, J.1. The only question referred in this case is as follows : AAHEWhether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was justified in holding that the assessee was entitled to standard deduction under section 16(i) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, in respect of the salaries received from each employer separately ?' 2. The question has to be answered in the negative, i.e., in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee in view of Explanation 1 introduced in section 16(i) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, with retrospective effect from April 1, 1975, by the Taxation Laws (Amendment) Act, 1984. The assessee in this case is employed by two companies and received salary from both the companies. He claimed standard deduction in respect of each salary separately. The question is whether he is entitled to standard deduction separately in respect of each salary or whether both the salaries received by him should be aggregated. This is precisely the si...
Girijan Co-operative Corporation Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-01-1989
Reported in: [1989]178ITR359(AP)
Jeevan Reddy, J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad, has referred the following question under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and having regard to the objects for which the assessee corporation has been established by the Government, the assessee can be considered to be a public charitable institution within the meaning of section 2(15) of the Income-tax Act. 1961, and consequently its income is liable to be excluded for assessment purposes under section 11 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?' 2. With a view to improve the conditions of the members of scheduled Tribes in the State and to put an end to explanation of the tribunal people by plainsmen, the Government thought it fit to establish a Finance and Marketing Corporation to provide the tribunal people with credit facilities, to procure and supply them their domestic requirements and other necessities of life, and to arrange for the marketing of their agricu...
Shri Vijayalakshmi Rice Mill Contractors Co. Vs. Commissioner of Incom ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-01-1989
Reported in: (1989)76CTR(AP)55; [1990]181ITR263(AP)
B.P. Jeevan Reddy, J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad, has referred the following question under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 : 'Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is justified in upholding the refusal of registration of the firm by the lower authorities ?' 2. The assessee filed a return in respect of the partnership firm, Shri Vijayalakshmi Rice Mill Contractors Co., Akividu, for the assessment year 1976-77 (accounting year ending on October 13, 1975). Along with the return, an application in Form No. 11 was filed seeking registration of the firm. The Income-tax Officer declined to register the firm on the ground that when called upon to produce the books of account, the assessee failed to produce the same on the plea that they were lost. He refused to accept that plea. On that basis, he held that there is no proof or material to know that profits were actually divided in a particular manner between the partners. So far as th...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »