Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Dec-27-1969
Reported in : [1971]79ITR333(AP)
Sriramulu, J.1. In this reference, made to this court at the instance of the Commissioner of Income-tax, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad, under Section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'), the following question of law arises for our consideration :' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the gratuity of Rs. 11 250 received by the assessee, on his retirement from the Life Insurance Corporation of India, in accordance with the Staff Regulations of 1960, is exempt from tax by virtue of the proviso to Explanation 2 of Sub-section (1) of Section 7 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 '2. On his retirement from the Life Insurance Corporation of India, the assessee, Sri B. Gopalakrishna Murthy, in accordance with the Staff Regulations of the Life Insurance Corporation of India, received retirement gratuity of Rs. 11,250 from his employers. The Life Insurance Corporation of India deducted the tax at source on the payment of gratuity mad...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Jun-27-1969
Reported in : AIR1970AP124
1. This is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issue of a Writ of Certiorari to quash the order of the second respondent, Commissioner for Workmen Compensation, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad in W. C. Case No. 283 of 1966 dated 2-8-1967 overruling an objection as to the maintainability of the claim for compensation before him. The first respondent herein filed the application before him. The first respondent herein filed the application before the Commissioner for Workmen Compensation, Andhra Pradesh under, the provisions of the Workmen's Compensation Ac, being the legal representative of the deceased workmen employed under the petitioner. The petitioner herein raised an objection before the Commissioner questioning his jurisdiction to entertain the claim in view of Section 110 of the Motor Vehicles Act under which a Claims Tribunal (District Judge) was specifically constituted to adjudicate upon all claims for compensation arising out of accidents involvin...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Jun-25-1969
Reported in : AIR1970AP384
Ramachandra Rao, J.1. This revision petition raises a short and interesting question as to whether the profession of an advocate comes within the meaning of the expression 'business' occurring in Section 10(3)(a) (iii) (a) and (b) of the Andhra Pradesh Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1960 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). In view of the importance of the question raise, our learned brother Obul Reddi, J., referred the matter to a Bench of two Judges and that is how the revision has come before us. We May also mention that apart form the above question arguments were advanced by the learned Counsel on other points also, inasmuch as the whole case has been referred to a Bench.2. The brief facts relevant for the purpose of the disposal of this revision may now be stated. The petitioner herein is the tenant and the respondent herein is the owner of a building bearing NO. 3119/1 situated at Rashtrapati Road in Secunderabd. In the building one room is facing the main ro...
Tag this Judgment!