Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Apr-19-1984
Reported in : [1991]82STC417(AP)
Jeevan Reddy, J.1. Taxes on cinema entertainment in the State of Andhra Pradesh are levied and governed by the Andhra Pradesh Entertainments Tax Act, 1939 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The Act was made by the Madras Legislature in 1939, simultaneously repealing the Madras Local Authorities Entertainments Tax Act, 1926. The object of the Act is to levy taxes on amusements and other entertainments, and to provide for the payment of compensation of the local authorities. The preamble to Act, as it now stands, reads as follows :'An Act to impose taxes on entertainments in the State of Andhra Pradesh. Whereas it is expedient to provide for the levy by the State Government of taxes on amusements and other entertainments, to repeal the Madras Local Authorities Entertainments Tax Act, 1926 (Madras Act V of 1927) and to provide for the payment of compensation to local authorities now levying a tax under the Act aforesaid, it is hereby enacted as follows :-' The Act which was in forc...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Aug-06-1984
Reported in : AIR1985AP127
Raju, J.1. This is a plaintiff's appeal, the plaintiff being the A.P.Wakf Board, Hyderabad (hereinafter called 'the Wakf Board'. The main dispute which falls for consideration in this appeal is whether the extent f Ac.2,215-85 cents in S.Nos. 212 to 216 in Devada Village and covered by Inam title deed No.42 is Wakf property. Claiming the property to be Wakf, the Wakf Board filed the suit O.S.No.148 of 1967 on the file of the Sub-court, Viskhapatnam, for cancellation of the registered lease dated 24-6-1949 (Ex.A6 is the registration extract of that lease deed) executed by Lutfa Rassol and 11 others in favour of the 10th defendant in the suit for a period of 99 years and for cancellation of the various subsequent leases or sub-leases executed in respect of the property and for recovering possession of the property from the 21 persons impleaded in the suit as defendants. The lessors and the lessee under Ex.A.6 remained ex parte in the suit. The suit was contested in the trial court only b...
Tag this Judgment!