Andhra Pradesh Court March 2001 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. Balakrishna Rao Vs. Joint Collector, Hyderabad-cum-additional Distr ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-31-2001
Reported in: 2001(3)ALD363; 2001(3)ALT55
ORDERS.B. Sinha, CJ 1. Writ petitioner is the appellant herein. He filed a writ petition being WP No.8025 of 1990 inter alia praying for issuance of a writ of certiorari quashing the order passed by the respondent herein in Proceedings No.D5/ 5345/89 dated 29-5-1990.2. The aforementioned proceedings were initiated, inter alia, on the ground that the appellant who is working as driver in Hyderabad Urban Development Authority (HUDA) had obtained false caste certificate. In terms of the said proceedings, while cancelling the caste certificate issued to the appellant by the Tahsildar, Secunderabad on 1-2-1980 certifying him as belonging to Manneravarlu community recognised as a Scheduled Tribe, the District Collector, Hyderabad was requested to initiate action against the Tahsildar, Secunderabad who had issued the caste certificate to the appellant without proper enquiry andjurisdiction to the appellant herein who is actually a resident of Kondamadugu, Nalgonda district.3. The learned sing...
Suryadevara Pullayya and Another Vs. Suryadevara Satyanarayana
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-31-2001
Reported in: 2001(3)ALD338; 2001(4)ALT94
1. This appeal is filed by the plaintiffs against the judgment of the Court of Subordinate Judge dismissing OS No.279 of 1983. The plaintiffs filed the suit for partition of the properties shown in the plaint 'A' and !B' schedules into two equal shares by metes and bounds and for putting the plaintiffs in separate possession of one such share. In this appeal the parties are referred as per their status in the suit. The case set up in the plaint as follows.2. The second plaintiff is the wife of one Ananthayya and the first plaintiff is his son. Ananthayya and Satyanarayana, the sole defendant, are brothers. It is the allegation that they constituted Hindu joint family and Ananthayya died on 5-3-1983 intestate and undivided with the defendant. Therefore, the plaintiffs are entitled to half share in the joint family properties. It is also stated that the first plaintiffs grandfather Basavayya had three sons, namely, Jaggayya, Ananthayya and Satyanarayana, When the defendant was minor, dur...
Dwarkadas Damodarlal Hedg, Hyderabad Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-31-2001
Reported in: 2001(3)ALD415; 2001(6)ALT219
ORDERS. Ananda Reddy, J.1.This taxrevision case is at the instance of the assessee-dealer directed against the order of the Sales Tax Appellant Tribunal in TA No,975 of 1988, dated 28-9-1992.2. The facts of the case in brief are asfollows :The petitioner is a dealer in pulses, sugar etc., and registered under the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') on the roles of the Commercial Tax Officer, Maharajgunj Circle, Hyderabad. For the assessment year 1984-85, the assessee filed its A2 returns disclosing the following turnovers:- Gross turnover Rs.2,38,60,876-66 ps. Exempted turnover Rs.79,68,926-16 ps. Net turnover Rs.1,58,91,950-50 ps.3. The Commercial Tax Officer, while framing the assessment, verified the books of accounts and arrived the following turnovers for the final assessment:-Purchase turnover ofMoong dall Rs.3,62,647-84 ps.Sales turnover ofgram dall Rs.1,75,83,054-24 ps.4. The Commercial Tax Officer found that the dealer did not maintain s...
Commissioner of Income Tax, Vishakhapatnam Vs. B.V.R. Glucose Products ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-31-2001
Reported in: 2001(3)ALD441
ORDERS. Ananda Reddy, J 1. At the instance of the revenue, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench, referred the following questions arising out of the order of the Tribunal in ITA No.1530/86, dated 16-1-1989, for the opinion of this Court under Section 256(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as 'the Act').(1) 'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Appellate Tribunal is justified in allowing carry forward and set-off of loss of astylar 1983-84 to subsequent assessment years, even though the return was filed by the assesses in response to notice issued under Section 148 of the Act?' (2) 'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Appellate Tribunal is justified in holding that the return filed by the assessee in response to notice issued under Section 148 could be treated as a return filed under Section 139(3) of the IT Act fcr the purpose of allowing carry forward and set off of loss to subsequent assessment years?'...
Andhra Pradesh Industrial Infrastructure Corporation Limited, Hyd. and ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-31-2001
Reported in: 2001(3)ALD529
ORDERS.B. Sinha, CJ 1. A short but interesting question which arises for consideration in this writ appeal is as to whether an application purported to have been made under Sections 30 and 33 of the Indian Arbitration Act, 1940 (hereinafter referred to as '1940 Act') can be treated to be an application under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as '1996 Act'). The parties entered into an agreement for construction of polytechnic hostel and staff quarters etc. Disputes and differenceshaving arisen between the parties as regards the performance of the aforementioned contract, inter alia invocation of bank guarantee. A writ petition was filed by the respondent herein which was marked as Writ Petition No. 11619 of 1996. The said writ petition was dismissed where against an appeal was filed by the respondent herein before a Division Bench of this Court which was marked as Writ Appeal No.836 of 1996. At the suggestion of the Division Bench, the pa...
Commissioner of Income Tax Visakhapatnam Vs. K. Pattabhirama Reddy
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-31-2001
Reported in: 2001(3)ALD462
ORDERS. Ananda Reddy, J 1. At the instance of the Revenue, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench 'B' referred the following questions under Section 256(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') said to arise out of its order in ITA No.518/H/85, dated 15-2-1988 for the assessment year 1981-82 for the opinion of this Court.1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the finding of the Appellate Tribunal that the assessee was maintaining the Branch Office at Baghdad fof promotion of sale outside India of services is perverse?' 2. 'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the appellate Tribunal is correct in holding that the assessee is entitled to weighted deduction in respect of theexpenses of the Branch Office at Baghdad under Section 358(1)(IV)?'2. The facts of the case are as under:The assessee is an individual. The assessment year in question is 1981-82 for which the previous year was the calender...
Mandala Madhava Rao Vs. Mandala Yadagiri and Others
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-31-2001
Reported in: 2001(3)ALD577; 2001(3)ALT295
1. This appeal by the first defendant in OS No.457 of 1983 (Old OS No.923 of 1980) is against the judgment in the said suit whereunder the Court of Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Secunderabad decreed the suit of the plaintiff/ first respondent herein and passed a preliminary decree directing the plaint schedule properties to be divided into three equal shares and further directing the plaintiff/first respondent to be put in one such share. For the sake of convenience, the parties herein are referred to as they are arrayed in OS No.457 of 1983.2. The plaintiff initially filed OS No.923 of 1980 on the file of the II Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad (later transferred to the Court of Additional Chief Judge and renumbered as OS No.457 of 1983) for partition of the joint family property left behind by his father, one Mandala Papaiah. The case of the plaintiff is as follows. Mandate Papaiah and his four brothers constituted a Hindu joint family. They separated and div...
Jagadish and Kamala Mittal Museum of Indian Arts Vs. Secretary, Minist ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-31-2001
Reported in: 2001(3)ALD799
ORDERElipe Dharma Rao, J 1. Jagdishand Kamala Mittal Museum of Indian Arts, represented by its Trustee Secretary filed this writ petition to issue a writ of certiorari or any other order or writ quashing the impugned letter dated 5-5-1997 issued by the Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India as illegal, arbitrary and to declare that the petitioner's trust is deemed to have been granted registration under the provisions of Section 11 of the Foreign Contributions (Regulations) Act, 1976 and pass such other orders which are deemed fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.2. The petitioner is a public charitable trust constituted under the trust deed dated 13-3-1976 by Sri Jagdish Candra Mittal and Smt. Kamala Devi Mittal and there are other ten trustees and is registered with the Sub-Registrar on 30-3-1976 with the main object to run the museum for the benefit of the public to appreciate and enjoy the aesthetics quality of the traditional arts and crafts of India and promote ...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. K. Pattaabhirama Reddy
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-31-2001
Reported in: [2001]117TAXMAN34(AP)
ORDERAnanda Reddy, J.At the instance of the revenue, the Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench B, referred the following questions under section 256(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) said to arise out of its order in IT Appeal No. 518 (Hyd.) of 1985, dated 15-2-1988 for the assessment year 1981-82 for the opinion of this court :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the finding of the Appellate Tribunal that the assessee was maintaining the Branch Office at Baghdad for promotion of sale outside India of services is perverse ?2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Appellate Tribunal is correct in holding that the assessee is entitled to weighted deduction in respect of the expenses of the Branch Office at Baghdad under section 35B(1)(iv) of the Income Tax Act, 1961?'2. The facts of the case are as under :The assessee is an individual. The assessment year in question is 1981-82 for which the previous ye...
Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited Higher Secondary School Staff Associa ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-30-2001
Reported in: 2001(3)ALD125; 2001(3)ALT164
ORDERS.B. Sinha, CJ 1. These two writ appeals involving common questions of law and fact were taken up for hearing together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.2. Writ Appeal No. 1496 of 2000 arise out of WP No.29998 of 1998 and Writ Appeal No.1497 of 2000 arise out of WP No.9339 of 2000.3. The teachers working in BHEL Higher Secondary School at Ramachandrapuram,Medak district and their Union filed variouswrit petitions for various reliefs in the abovewrit petitions. 4. The relief claimed in Writ Petition WP No.29998 of 1998 (Writ Appeal No. 1496) was as follows:'(a) to continue to run the BHEL Higher Secondary School with all the classesfrom LKG to 12th Class as before as a welfare measure to the employees of BHEL as per the objectives in the Company's Memorandum of Association and in discharge of constitutional obligation under Article 45 of the Constitution of India as long as BHEL exists and declaring that the petitioners 2 to 9 herein and all other teaching staff of ...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »