Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Jan-02-1988
Reported in : AIR1988AP62
K. Bhaskaran, C.J. 1. This is one of the extraordinary cases without any parallel., not a lis of the mundane orthodox pattern. but a unique public interest litigation which seeks to explore the realm of accountability of the executive to the people through the judiciary, hence it assumes great significance and has naturally attracted considerable attention of the public. 2. The petitioner, Sri Dronamrajii Satyanarayana, a public worker and the Organising Secretary of the Coastal Districts Congress-1 Committee of Andhra Pradesh filed four writ petitions :124ZS/87,124261/87. 12427/87 and 12805/87 in this Court on 24-8- 1987 alleging various violations of laws and constitutional provisions by Shri N. T. Rama Rao, the first respondent-Chief Minister, and the State Government, the second respondent. A common affidavit running into 193 pages was filed in support of the reliefs sought. He sought a writ of quo warranto in W.P. No. 12425/87 against the first respondent declaring that he was an ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Jun-28-1988
Reported in : [1989]65CompCas451(AP)
P.A. Chowdary, J.1. The appellant in this Second Appeal No. 812 of 1987 was the plaintiff in O.S. No. 42 of 1984 on the file of the Subordinate Judge's Court, Narasapur. The appellant is the Indian Bank. It was constituted by the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act (Act No. 5 of 1970) passed by our Parliament. It lent monies to the defendants and sued them (the present respondents) is O.S. No. 42 of 1984 on the file of the Subordinate Judge's Court, Narasapur, for recovery of a sum of Rs. 13,500. The plaintiff advanced the above sum of money under the Agricultural Short-term Productions Loan Scheme and the defendents borrowed a sum of Rs. 6,000 from the plaintiff-bank. The defendants executed a promissory note on June 2, 1978. Additionally, the repayment of the said amount was fully secured by hypothecation of the defendants' crops, present and future, grown over an area of Ac. 5.00 of land in R.S. No. 228 of Bangiligudem village, and belonging to the defen...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Apr-25-1988
Reported in : [1988]174ITR318(AP)
Jeevan Reddy, J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad, has referred the following five questions under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. They are : '(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the amount of Rs. 2 lakhs received by the assessee could not be considered as a revenue receipt (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the provisions of section 28(ii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, are not applicable to the facts of the case (3) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the amount of Rs. 2 lakhs could not be brought to tax for the assessment year 1971-72 (4) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the amount of Rs. 55,000 received by way of interest was not taxable for the assessment year 1971-72 (5) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was justified in holding that the amount of interest of Rs. 55,000 received on February 23, 197...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Apr-29-1988
Reported in : (1988)71CTR(AP)88; [1989]175ITR154(AP)
Jagannadha Rao, J.1. This is a reference at the instance of the Commissioner of Income-tax and the reference reads as follows : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the bottles and shells constitute 'plant' and depreciation is admissible thereon under section 32(1)(ii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 1976-77 ?' 2. The assessee is a private limited company manufacturing soft drinks and selling the same at Hyderabad and other places. The first assessment of the company was made for the assessment year 196-768. From the assessment year 1967-68 up to and inclusive of the assessment year 1975-76, the assessee-company was claiming breakages in bottles in the respective years as a deduction. For the assessment year 1976-77 (year ending June 30, 1975), the assessee-company has claimed deduction under the first proviso to section 32(1)(ii) of the Act in respect of the bottles and shells purchased and put to use during the year. The assessee had claim...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Apr-25-1988
Reported in : (1988)73CTR(AP)112; [1988]172ITR632(AP)
B.P. Jeevan Reddy, J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad, has referred the following question under section 26(1) of the Gift-tax Act, 1958, for the opinion of this court : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the release by the assessee, who was one of the partners in the firm of 3-Aces, of his rights in the assets of the firm for a consideration of Rs. 3,00,000 when the market value of the assets of the firm in proportion to his share was in excess thereof, did not amount to a gift within the meaning of the Gift-tax Act ?' 2. The assessment year concerned in 1972-73. The original assessment under the Gift-tax Act was made on October 12, 1972, on a total gift of Rs. 70,000, but thereafter it was reopened under section 26(1) of the Act. 3. A partnership firm under the name and style '3-Aces' was constituted on January 9, 1965, by two brothers, Jagatram Ahuja ('the assessee' herein) and Bishanlal Ahuja. The firm ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Aug-05-1988
Reported in : [1989]177ITR540(AP)
Jeevan Reddy, J. 1. I agree with the answer proposed by my learned brother, Y. V. Anjaneyulu J. (printed below) but for a different reason. I agree with the Tribunal that the subsidy granted by the Government in terms of G.O. Ms. No. 1290 dated December 31, 1971, was granted for producing a capital asset - a firm is a capital asset in the hands of the producer - and, therefore, the true character of the receipts in the hands of the assessee was on capital account, the Tribunal's finding is that the subsidy is granted 'for the production of the assets'. I agree that that is the dominant purpose of the G.O. The subsidy is meant for defraying partly the cost of production of films produced in Andhra pradesh. The several requirements of the G.O. - detailed in the order of my learned brother - all pertain to the stage of production, one this is so, the decision of this court in CIT v. Sahney Steel and Press Works Ltd. : [1985]152ITR39(AP) , becomes clearly distinguishable. That was a case w...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Jan-20-1988
Reported in : 1988(1)ALT337
M. Jagannadha Rao, J.1. This is an appeal preferred by the legal representatives of the deceased claiming compensation in a sum of Rs. 52,000/- under Section 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The accident occurred on 8-4-1984 and the deceased who met with the accident died three days later, on 11-4-1984. At the time of death, the deceased was was aged 40 years and it is claimed that he was earning Rs. 30/- per day by selling kirana articles on his cycle. The Tribunal went into this question and awarded a sum of Rs. 25,600/-, out of which Rs. 21,600/- is relatable to the loss of dependency and Rs. 4,000/- is towards loss of consortium. Interest was awarded at 6% P.A. from the date of petition. The claimants in this case are the wife, mother and two sons of the deceased.2. The learned counsel for the appellant, Sri P. Gopaldas representing Sri P. Ramakrishna Raju has contended that the award is liable to be enhanced not only by increasing pecuniary dam...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Oct-11-1988
Reported in : 1992(2)ALT24
K. Ramaswamy, J.1. The six petitioners were admittedly granted leases in Warangal Division to extract Abnus leaves in terms of the A.P.Minor Forest Produce (Regulation of Trade) Act, 1971 (for short 'the Act) and the A.P. Minor Forest Produce (Regulation of Trade in Abnus Leaves) Rules, 1970 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules'). They entered into statutory contracts with the Divisional Forest Officer and deposited certain amounts as security deposits. For one reason or the other, their contracts were terminated. They sought for adjustment of the security deposits towards the amounts due to the Government. Instructions were sought for from the Government in that regard. The Government in the impugned Memorandum No. 48830/For.III/81-8 dated October 4, 1982 clarified that under Rule 31 of the A.P. Forest Contract (Disposal of Forest Produce) Rules, 1977 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Forest Rules') power is only to forfeit the security deposit. That power was given under the provisi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Aug-08-1988
Reported in : AIR1989AP140; [1991]72CompCas247(AP)
Jeevan Reddy, J. 1. This Writ Appeal is preferred by the 1st respondent in W.P. No. 20019/87, against the judgment of the learned single Judge allowing the writ petition. For the sake of convenience we shall refer to the parties with reference to their ranking in the writ petition.2. The petitioner-company, 'Bhanu Construction Company (Private) Ltd.', is engaged in the business of fabrication and construction of Transmission Towers, laying of transmission lines, and other similar works. It was awarded three works by the National Thermal Power Corporation Ltd., (1st respondent in the writ petition and appellant in this Writ Appeal), the particulars whereof are : --(i) laying of transmission line over a length of 220 Kilometres from Cuddapah to Bangalore, valued at Rs. 360 Lakhs awarded on 31-3-1982; (ii) laying of transmission line between Cuddapah and Madras (Cuddapah Red Hills), over a length of 110 Kilometres, valued at Rs. 370 Lakhs awarded on 25-7-1983; and (iii) laying of transmi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Apr-13-1988
Reported in : [1989]175ITR187(AP)
Jeevan Reddy, J.1. Three question are referred for the opinion of this court under section 64(1) of the Estate Duty Act, 1953. They are : '(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal is justified in holding that the debts due to Sri T. Pradyumna Kumar Reddy and Sri T. Prabhas Kumar Reddy are not to be abated under section 46(1) of the Estate Duty Act, 1953 (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal is justified in holding that the repayments of debts made by the deceased to Smt. T. Sudarsanamma and Smt. T. Priyamvada within the period of two years preceding the date of death cannot be included in the estate of the deceased under section 46(2) of the Estate Duty Act, 1953 (3) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is justified in upholding the order of the Appellate Controller deleting the addition of Rs. 1,88,084 made by the Assistant Controller ...
Tag this Judgment!