Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : [1977]108ITR465(AP)
Kondaiah, J.1. At the instance of the Additional Commissioner of Income-tax, Andhra Pradesh, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench, has submitted an agreed statement of the case and referred under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the following question of law for the opinion of this court:'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the incomes of the two broken periods for each of the two assessment years 1966-67 and 1967-68 could not be clubbed and tax should be computed separately on the income for the aforesaid broken periods for the said two assessment years ?'2. In order to appreciate the scope of the question, it is not only profitable but necessary to briefly state the material facts and circumstances that gave rise to the same and which lie in a short compass and are not in dispute: M/s. Visakha Flour Mills, the assessee-firm, was constituted under an instrument of partnership dated January 10, 1964, with 19 partners. The assessee derive...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 2006(4)ALD596; 2006(3)ARBLR575(AP)
ORDERC.V. Ramulu, J.1. In all these civil revision petitions, common questions of law and facts arise for consideration; therefore, they are being disposed of together by this common order.2. C.R.P. No. 3722 of 1999 is filed aggrieved by the order dated 29-64999 made in LA. No. 1094 of 1988 in O.S. No. 82 of 1998 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Ramachandrapuram, East Godavari District. Likewise, C.R.P. No. 3836 of 1999 is filed against the order dated 29-6-1999 made in LA. No. 1093 of 1998 in O.S. No. 82 of 1998, C.R.P. No. 3910 of 1999 is also filed against the order dated 29.6.1999 made in LA. No. 1093 of 1998 in O.S. No. 82 of 1998, C.R.P. No. 2980 of 2002 is filed against the order dated 29-6-1999 made in LA. No. 1092 of 1998 in O.S. No. 82 of 1998 and C.R.P. No. 3035 of 2002 is filed against the order dated 29-6-1999 made in LA. No. 1091 of 1998 in O.S. No. 82 of 1998.3. Except C.R.P. No. 3910 of 1999, which was filed by Defendant Nos. 4, 5 and 8, all other C.R.Ps. are file...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 2003(1)ALD(Cri)679; 2003(1)ALT(Cri)497; III(2003)BC352; 2003CriLJ2498
ORDERK.C. Bhanu, J. 1. This petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the proceedings in C.C. No. 197/2001 on the file of the Additional Munsif Magistrate, Cherala. 2. The brief facts that are necessary for the disposal of the present petition are that the accused-petitioner-M/s. Bhangaru Packaging Co., represented by its Proprietor Sri M. Madhusudan Rao, purchased adhesives from the complainant-1st respondent-Marwel Organics represented by its Managing Partner Sri Daggubati Srinivas Prasad on credit to a tune of Rs. 1,95,000/- as on 13.7.2000, that the petitioner issued a cheque bearing No. 669850, dated 113.7.2000 for Rs. 1,95,000/- to the 1st respondent, that when the cheque was dishonoured for want of funds, the 1st respondent requested the petitioner to pay the amount of the dishonoured cheque, that thereafter the petitioner issued another cheque bearing No. 957941, on 24.1.22001 for Rs. 1,13,958/-, as the previous cheque was time-barred, with ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : [1972]85ITR109(AP)
Narasimham, J. 1. These appeals and revisions are preferred against the orders of the subordinate judge, Narsapur, in E.As. Nos. 527/63, 555/63, I.A. No. 65/66 and E.A. No. 390/62 rejecting the claim of the income-tax department and of the sales tax department for priority in the collection of their dues. All these petitions were filed after the final decree in O.S. No. 78 of 1948. The said suit was filed by Munagala Basavaiah and Kutumba Rao, partners, against the legal representative of the deceased partner and another for dissolution of the firm, Sri Jayalakshmi Rice Mill at Undi and for accounts. The main defendants were the legal representatives of the deceased partner, Salankayala Subbiah. The first defendant in the suit was his son, Salankayala Pulleswara Rao. A preliminary decree was passed on April 6, 1951, for accounts declaring the partnership dissolved as from the date of suit, November 29, 1948. A receiver was appointed to realise the assets of the partnership, to discharg...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : [1997]227ITR244(AP)
B.S. Raikote, J.1. This is a reference made under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, vide its reference order dated June 15, 1987, passed in R. A. No. 162/Hyd of 1986. This reference was made on the request of the Revenue. The question referred is as under : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Appellate Tribunal was correct in holding that the assessee firm was entitled to registration ?' 2. The undisputed facts are that the assessee, Oriental T. Maritimes, Visakhapatnam, filed an application under section 185(1)(b) of the Income-tax Act for registration. The assessee-firm is constituted by five adult partners and three miners. Of the three miners, two were clearly admitted only to the benefits of the partnership. In respect of another minor by name Padmapriya, the deed made no distinction between her and other adult partners and as per the partnership deed she had an interest of 20 per cent. in the profit ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : [1973]91ITR333(AP)
Sriramulu, J. 1. These two references are made by the HyderabadBench of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, at the instance of twodifferent assessees under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Thequestion referred to us, for our opinion, in both the cases is : ' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee-firm was entitled to registration for the assessment year 1963-64, under Section 185 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?'2. Since a common question of law arose on similar facts in both the cases, common arguments were addressed. Hence, it is convenient to dispose them of by a common judgment, although the assessees are different in both the cases 3. The material facts giving rise to these references are : Consequent upon the death of Lasraj Khummaji, one of the four partners of M/s. Khummaji Milapchand & Co. (in R.C. No. 65 of 1968) and M/s. Sokalchand Indermal & Co., (in R.C. 82 of 68), on September 17, 1961, the assessee-firms were reconstituted by inst...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
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!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 1999(5)ALD398; 1999(5)ALT47
ORDER1. The question that falls for consideration in this case is whether the Management of the Transmission Corporation of Andhra Pradesh Limited, for short, 'the TRANSCO' is justified and acted legally in seeking to disqualify the petitioner at the threshold of the awarding of the work contracts covered by package No.WB/APSEB/TR/RS-20 on the ground that the petitioner lacks the prescribed experience.2. The facts that led to the filing of the writ petition be stated briefly as under: The petitioner and one Sri P. Radha Krishna Reddy, hereinafter referred to as 'PRR', for the sake of brevity, constituted a partnership firm in the name and style of M/s. Aditya Transmission on 20-11-1991 with equal shares. The partnership firm was involved in the execution of the work of erection of the transmission lines mainly of Andhra Pradesh State Electricity Board, for short 'APSEB', the predecessor of the TRANSCO which came into being in the place of APSEB with effect from 1-2-1999. Due to some pe...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 2000(3)ALD559
1. In this appeal, the plaintiff challenges the dismissal of his suit under the judgment and decree in OS No.289 of 1983 dated 18-11-1985 on the file of the Subordinate Judge at Kakinada. The suit claim is for recovery of Rs.32,209/- on the foot of a promissory note in Ex.A1 dated 2-12-1974 for Rs.10,000/- borrowed by the defendant which was agreed to be repaid on demand with interest at Rs.1.40 ps., per month on yearly compound. Of the said amount, the defendant paid a sum of Rs.1,000/- on 18-11-1977 and Rs.500/- on 6-10-1980 by making due endorsements on the reverse of the pronote. Later though the defendant addressed a letter dated 30-1-1983 in Ex.A6 requesting time for payment till March, 1983, the amount was not paid, ll was claimed that the defendant is a business man doing business in the manufacture of tiles and is an income tax assessee and thus not entitled to the benefits of Act 4 of 1938 or Act 7 of 1977. The demands made by the plaintiff remained unheeded. Hence the suit.2...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : AIR2009AP466
G. Yethirajulu, J.1. The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is preferred by the plaintiff in O.S. No. 1601 of 1983 on the file of the II Senior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad.2. The suit was filed seeking accounts of the dissolved partnership firm business and payment of profits to the extent of 25ps towards share of the plaintiff. A preliminary decree was passed by the lower Court and later an application covered by I.A. No. 1247 of 2001 was filed under Order 40 Rule 7 read with Section 151 C.P.C. to appoint a commissioner to take possession of the assets of the partnership firm including the land in Survey No. 28/1 to 3 situated at Begumpet, Hyderabad and the account books of the firm M/s Viraj Constructions on the basis of inventory taken by a commissioner during pendency of the suit, after taking possession of the land and account books seeking to settle accounts pertaining to his share of profits as per preliminary decree, dated 06.11.1995 as modified by the High Court by its or...
Tag this Judgment!