Andhra Pradesh Court June 1990 Judgments
income-tax Officer Vs. Lakshmi Enterprises and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-28-1990
Reported in: [1990]185ITR595(AP)
Ranga Reddy, J. 1. These five Appeals Nos. 793 of 1989, 794 of 1989, 795 of 1989, 796 of 1989 and 797 of 1989 are filed by the complainant in C. C. Nos. 26 of 1988, 78 of 1988, 28 of 1988, 29 of 1988 and 27 of 1988, respectively, on the file of the Special Judge for the Economic Offences, Hyderabad, against the judgment dated January 3, 1989. 2. The facts so far as are necessary for the disposal of these matters can briefly be stated as follows : The appellant-complainant filed separate complaints against the respondents herein alleging that they have contravened the provisions of section 269SS of the Income-tax Act and have rendered themselves liable for punishment under section 276DD of the Income-tax Act. The first respondent in these appeals is a partnership firm and the second respondent is its managing partner. According to the provisions of section 269SS of the Income-tax Act introduced by the Finance Act of 1984, with effect from April 1, 1984, no person shall, after the day of...
Tag this Judgment!Kommineni Krishna Rao Vs. Kommineni Babjee Rao and Another
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-25-1990
Reported in: AIR1991AP232
ORDERP.L.N. Sharma, J. 1. The plaintiff is the appellant in L.P.A. No. 92 of 1983 while the first defendant is the appellant in L. P. A. No. 7 of 1985. Both the appeals are filed against the judgment of the learned single judge in A. S. No. 1234 of 1980. While the plaintiff filed the appeal L.P.A. No. 92 of 1983 against the rejection of the relief prayed by him for dissolution of partnership and rendition of accounts on the ground that the same is illegal and opposed to public policy, the 1st defendant filed the other appeal L.P. No. 7 of 1985 against the relief granted to the plaintiff for payment of the money said to be outstanding to his credit in the account.2. The relevant facts are as follows: For the purpose of convenience, the parties are referred to in this judgment as they are arrayed in the suit.3. The suit was filed for partition of the plaint schedule properties into 100 equal shares and for allotment of 33 such shares to the plaintiff and for subsequent interests and prof...
Tag this Judgment!Kommineni Krishna Rao Vs. Kommineni Babjee Rao and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-25-1990
Reported in: [1992]75CompCas121(AP)
P.L.N. Sarma, J.1. The plaintiff is the appellant in L.P.A. No. 92 of 1983 while the first defendant is the appellant in L.P.A. No. 7 of 1985. Both the appeals are filed against the judgment of the learned single judge in A.S. No. 1234 of 1980. While the plaintiff filed the appeal, L.P.A. No. 92 of 1983, against the rejection of the relief prayed for by him for dissolution of partnership and rendition of accounts on the ground that the same is illegal and opposed to public policy, the first defendant filed the other appeal, L.P.A. No. 7 of 1985, against the relief granted to the plaintiff for payment of the money said to be outstanding to his credit in the account. 2. The relevant facts are as follows : For the purpose of convenience, the parties are referred to in this judgment as they are arrayed in the suit. 3. The suit was filed for partition of the plaint schedule properties into 100 equal shares and for allotment of 33 such shares to the plaintiff and for subsequent interest, pro...
Tag this Judgment!Durga Prasad Soni and anr. Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-21-1990
Reported in: 1990(2)ALT704; 1992CriLJ1614
ORDER1. The main question of law that arises for consideration in this revision is : whether an appeal lies under Section 374, Cr.P.C. against the judgment of the Addl. Judicial First Class Magistrate convicting the accused-petitioner for an offence under Section 23 of the Market Committee Act and sentencing them to pay a fine of Rs. 100/- each; in default to suffer one month S.I. and further directing that in the event the accused failing to pay the market fee due, they shall pay a further fine at Rs. 5/- per day for the period of which the contravention continues or whether the bar imposed under S. 376(c), Cr.P.C. of 1973 applies and the appeal is not maintainable. 2. The facts of the case are : The Agricultural Market Committee, Nizamabad, filed a complaint against the two petitioners herein alleging that the said petitioners obtained a licence for conducting business in the area of the Market Committee and in pursuance of the licence they purchased the agricultural produce which ca...
Tag this Judgment!Gulbanu Razack Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax (investigation ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-21-1990
Reported in: [1990]186ITR226(AP)
1. This writ petition is filed by Smt. Gulbanu Razack for the issue of a writ of mandamus directing the respondent to pay a sum of Rs. 74,498 to the petitioner towards compensatory interest at the rate of per cent. per month on the sum of Rs. 1,00,000 (one lakh) which was refunded to the petitioner by the Income-tax Department. Interest is claimed for the period from September 26, 1986, the date of seizure, up to November 9, 1989, the date of refund. 2. For the purpose of appreciating the points arising in the case, it is necessary to state the following facts. 3. A search operation was conducted by the income-tax authorities under section 132 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called 'the Act'), on September 26, 1986, at the premises, House No. 6-3-629/1, Ravindernagar, Khairatabad, Hyderabad, belonging to the petitioner's husband. During the course of the search, a sum of 1,80,000 was found and seized. It is stated, that, during the course of the search, it was represented to t...
Tag this Judgment!Pothuri Ananda Venkata Subba Rao Gupta Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-20-1990
Reported in: 1991CriLJ1115
ORDER1. This is a revision filed by the petitioner against the conviction under Section 16(1A)(ii) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, and sentence of R.I. for one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 3,000/- in default to undergo R.I. for a period of three months and conviction under S. 16(1-C) to suffer R.I. for a period of two months and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- in default to suffer R.I. for one. 2. The facts of the case are that the Food Inspector (P.W. 1) of Krishna District is empowered to take sample of Food Articles (vide G.O. Ms. No. 467 M&H; dated 18-7-1979 published at page 697 part-I of A.P. Gazette dated 9-8-1979). P.W. 1 is also authorised to institute prosecution under the Act vide G.O. Ms. No. 62 M&H; (L1) Department dated 30-1-1985. The accused is the proprietor of Messrs. Sri Dhanalkshmi General Stores, Door No. 2-1, Main Road, Pedana, Bandar Taluk, Krishna District, and is prosecuting his business. P.W. 1 along with panch witness and another P.W. 3 visited t...
Tag this Judgment!Muthu Enterprises Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-20-1990
Reported in: [1990]79STC175(AP)
Yogeshwara Dayal, C.J. and A. Lakshmana Rao, J.1. This tax revision case has been filed by the assessee against the order of the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad, dated 23rd April, 1990 where the Tribunal declined the application for condonation of delay in filing an application for restoration of an appeal which was dismissed for default of appearance on behalf of the assessee. The case of the petitioner before the Tribunal was they felt that the assessee had no case before the Tribunal in view of the decision of this Court in Raj Sheel's case [1987] 64 STC 398 and that the present applications for setting aside dismissal of the appeal were filed since the Supreme Court (See Raj Sheel v. State of Andhra Pradesh [1989] 74 STC 379.) has set aside the decision of the High Court and has remanded the matter to the High Court after laying down certain guidelines for deciding the taxability. 2. Without going into question whether there was sufficient cause for condonati...
Tag this Judgment!Mupparaju Nageshwara Rao Alias Nagaiah Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-19-1990
Reported in: 1991CriLJ549
ORDER1. The question of law involved in this revision is, whether the default sentence of imprisonment is to be added to the substantive sentence of imprisonment for purposes of determining the appellate forum under S. 374, Cr.P.C. 2. Section 374, Cr.P.C. to the extent relevant reads : '374. Appeals from convictions. (1) ......... (2) Any person convicted on a trial held by a Sessions Judge or an Additional Sessions Judge or on a trial held by any other Court in which a sentence of imprisonment for more than seven years has been passed against him or against any other person convicted at the same trial may appeal to the High Court. (3) Save as otherwise provided in sub-section (2), any person - (a) convicted on a trial held by a Metropolitan Magistrate or Assistant Sessions Judge or Magistrate of First Class or of the Second Class, or (b) to (c) ........ May appeal to the Court of Session.' 3. In the case on hand, the petitioner was sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for seven ...
Tag this Judgment!The Principal, the Besant theosophical College Vs. S. Jahanara Begum a ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-19-1990
Reported in: 1992(1)ALT161
K. Amareswari, J.1. First respondent was appointed as a part-time lecturer in Hindi in the appellant college at Madanapally on August 6, 1981 on payment of remuneration on hourly basis. While she was working as part-time lecturer, the management of the appellant College issued an advertisement, published in the daily newspaper 'Andhra Patrika' dated April 30, 1983 calling for applications for filling-up the posts of lecturers on a regular basis in various subjects, such as English, Telugu, Hindi, History, Political Science, Commerce, Horticulture, Botany etc. The petitioner had applied for the post of lecturer in Hindi, She was called for interview on July 9, 1983 by the selection committee. Her case is that she was selected and placed at No. 1 in the selection list, but inspite of the same she was not appointed by the management. She made a representation on March 31, 1984 to the Director of Higher Education, third respondent herein, bringing the above facts to his notice and requesti...
Tag this Judgment!A. Pentaiah Vs. the Personnel Officer, B.H.E.L.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-18-1990
Reported in: (1993)IIILLJ55AP
ORDERRadhakrishna Rao, J. 1. This writ petition is filed by the petitioner, who was an employee in the B.H.E.L. for issuance of a writ of mandamus calling for the records pertaining to proceedings No. P.A/C5/8525/1829025/1069 dated 3.12.1.986 issued by the respondent-Company and to quash the same. The impugned proceedings reads as follows: 'On attaining the superannuation age, Sri A. Pentaiah (Staff No. 1829025), Sr. Security Guard, Grade III of Security Department will retire from the Company's service on the afternoon of 24th January, 1987. His dues, if any, will be paid to him on receipt of 'No Dues Certificates' from all concerned.' The Petitioner's case is that he was only53 years of age and the date of birth hasbeen wrongly noted as 1.1.1929. According to him his actual date of birth is 10.8.1933.In support of his case, he filed an age certificate given by the Medical Officer, MandalPrimary Health Centre, Chagallu R.R. District wherein it has been mentioned thatthe petitioner wa...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »