Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Mar-03-1987
Reported in : [1987]168ITR393(AP)
K. Ramaswamy, J. 1. The assessee is the Andhra Pradesh Riding Club registered under the Societies Registration Act. Article 2 of the articles of the club postulates its object thus : 'The object of the Club is to promote and popularise riding, mounted sports, racing and polo, and to train its members 'especially' the student members, in the art of horsemanship.' 2. Article 3 provides for membership and empowers the managing committee to admit desirable persons of either sex to ordinary membership as well as bona fide students of any educational or vocational or technical institution to student membership. Article 5 authorises that the club shall maintain a school of equestrian games with well-qualified riding instructors to impart instruction in riding. Article 6 provides that the school shall conduct riding classes twice a week, and attendance at these shall be compulsory for student members, at least once a week. Article 20 gives power to the managing committee to reject any applicat...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Mar-19-1987
Reported in : [1989]176ITR160(AP)
Jeevan Reddy, J.1. Three identical questions are referred in these references. The assessee is common. The questions referred are : '(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in holding that there was no legal impediment to a major entering into a contractual relationship with others, respectively, from a point of time when he or she was a minor (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in holding that the partnership agreement dated January 4, 1972, did not, in any case, have the effect of making Shashi Rani liable for losses occurring or arising during her minority, though the partnership was stipulated to commence from a point of time when she was a minor (3) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the partnership was not opposed to any of the provisions of the Excise Act or the rules thereunder and was not vi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Apr-15-1987
Reported in : AIR1988AP215
ORDER1. This review petition raises two questions of law :1. Whether a letters patent appeal lay to a Division Bench against an appellate order of single Judge in an appeal under O. 43, R.1, C.P.C. read with S. 104(1), C.P.C. and whether S. 104(2) was a bar to the maintainability of a Letters patent appeal under cl.15 of the Letters Patent and consequently whether this review petition is not maintainable? 2. Whether in the case of a sale or a share in the hypotheca by some of the co- mortgagors to the usufructuary mortgagee, S. 60 of the T.P. Act requires the non- alienating co-mortgagor to sue for redemption of his own share and whether, if the sale in favour of the mortgagee is pending the suit filed for redemption and possession of the whole Property, S. 52 of the T.P. Act requires the mortgagee to first surrender possession of the entire property and then sue for partition and possession.? 2. I shall initially deal with the first question mentioned above and 1 shall deal with the s...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Jan-23-1987
Reported in : (1987)62CTR(AP)189; [1988]170ITR332(AP)
K. Ramaswamy, J. 1. The Revenue sought reference under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (43 of 1961), for short, 'the Act', of six questions of law as follows : '(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the expenditure of Rs. 17,056 spent by the assessee for hosting dinners to foreign delegation members in order to entertain them in an appropriate and befitting manner is not disallowable under section 37(2B) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, though it may be for purposes of business (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the amount of Rs. 2,668 spent by Delhi branch of the assessee for providing lunch and dinners to customers is not to be treated as entertainment expenditure and disallowed under section 37(2B) of the Income-tax Act 1961 (3) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, a sum of Rs. 1,79,155 debited under the head 'Business promotion expenses' was not rightly disallowable as expenditure in the nature of...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Jan-27-1987
Reported in : (1987)63CTR(AP)166; [1987]167ITR643(AP)
K. Ramaswamy, J.1. This reference arises under section 27(1) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 (27 of 1957), for short 'the Act', at the instance of the Revenue, which reads thus : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the amount paid to the residuary legatee is eligible for deduction in computing the net wealth in the hands of the executor ?' 2. The facts set out in the statement of the case are that one Pannalal Lahoti executed a will on April 21, 1956, and he died seven days thereafter, i.e., April 28, 1956, leaving behind him his widow, Bheema Bai and daughter, Govind Bai, as his heirs. Under the will, he also bequeathed a sum of Rs. 50,000 to Aruna Bai - a minor (his daughter's daughter) to be paid to her on her attaining majority. He has given authority to his wife to adopt a son, pursuant to which his widow adopted Sureshchandra Lahoti as his son. Under the will, on such adoption, his widow, daughter and adopted son, each was entitled to 1/4th share and the resi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Feb-06-1987
Reported in : AIR1987AP267
Amareswari, J. 1. An extent of 110 acres in Survey Nos. 57 and 58 of Pocharam Village, Yellanud Taluk, Khammam District was notified by the Government of Andhra Pradesh on 31-7-1972 as available for granting a mining lease for Barytes.2. On the same day, i.e. 31-7-1972, the 4th respondent M/s. Expo Chemicals, Kothagudem applied for the lease. The petitioner M/s. Berium Chemicals Ltd., Ramavaram, Khammam District also applied for a mining lease over the same area on 2-8-1972 i.e., two days later.3. The State Government by its order in G. O. Ms. No. 232, dated 6-4-1973 granted the lease to M/s. Expo Chemicals, the 4th respondent on the sole ground that their application was received earlier than that of the petitioner and as such they have a preferential right under S. 11(2), Mines and Minerals (Regulation and Development) Act, 1957, hereinafter called the Act.4. The petitioner carried the matter in revision under S. 30 read with R. 54, Minerals Concession Rules, 1960. The Central Govern...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Feb-10-1987
Reported in : (1987)63CTR(AP)360; [1987]167ITR683(AP)
K. Ramaswamy, J. 1. At the instance of the Revenue, this reference under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (43 of 1961), for short, 'the Act', has been made. The reference reads thus : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was justified in reducing the penalty under section 271(1)(a) from Rs. 25,000 to Rs. 3,000 ?' 2. For the assessment year 1970-71, the assessee submitted a return for a sum of Rs. 1,01,805 and later he submitted a revised return for Rs. 1,09,406. However, the assessing authority computed the income at Rs. 2,08,018 and initiated penalty proceedings for concealment of income under section 271(1)(c) of the Act. Since the maximum penalty imposible has exceeded the limit prescribed under the Act, the Income-tax Officer made a reference to the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner under section 274(2) of the Act. But by the time the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner took up the matter for consideration, the appeal against t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Feb-24-1987
Reported in : (1987)63CTR(AP)305; [1987]167ITR66(AP)
K. Ramaswamy, J.1. This reference under section 26 of the Gift-tax Act, 1958, (Act 18 of 1958) (for short 'the Act'), has arisen at the instance of the Revenue for our opinion on the question posed thus : '(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was justified in holding that the deed executed on March 21, 1970, partakes the nature of a family settlement and that the transaction was not a transfer or aliention liable to gift-tax (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was justified in holding that there was no texable gift to the married daughter in spite of the transfer of agricultural lands being effected after a lapse of years after the marriage ?' The material facts in support of the reference are that the assessee, an individual, during the assessment year 1970-71 executed a partion deed on March 21, 1970, by which he gave away acres 9.94 of wet of wet land to his married daughter, Smt. Sr...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Mar-19-1987
Reported in : AIR1988AP18
Jayachandra Reddy, J.1. Defendants 1 and 2 viz. the State of Andhra Pradesh represented by the Collector, West Godayari District, Eluru and the Director of Agriculture (Cane Commissioner), Government of Andbra Pradesh in O.S. No. 33 of 973 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Tanuku are the appellants. The 1st respondent herein viz., the Andhra Bank Limited filed he suit for a declaration that the plaintiff is entitled to certain sums, in the alternative for a money decree against some of the defendants. The 3rd defendant in the suit is the Sivakami Reserve Area Cane Producers and Suppliers and the 4th defendant is the Sivakami Sugars Ltd. a Public Limited Company now at Madurai. 5th defendant is he Managing Director of Sivakami Sugars Ltd., who died and. defendants 6 to 19 are his legal representatives. 2. The plaintiff provided certain credit facilities to the 4th defendant, Sivakmi Sugars Ltd. and allowed open cash credit to the extent of Rs.5,00.000/- and key cash credit to the ex...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Mar-24-1987
Reported in : [1987]169ITR555(AP)
B.P. Jeevan Reddy, J.1. The only question referred in this case relates to the computation of the capital base of the assessee-company under the Companies (Profits) Surtax Act, 1964. The question referred is : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in holding that the excess provision made for depreciation was a reserve forming part of the capital for the purpose of surta ?' 2. The assessee is Vazir Sultan Tobacco Company, a public limited company, engaged in manufacturing cigarettes and other tobacco products. 3. The Second Schedule to the Act provides rules for computing the capital of a company for the purpose of surtax. Rule 1, in so far as it is relevant, reads as follows : '1. Subject to the other provisions contained in this Schedule, the capital of a company shall be the aggregate of the amounts, as on the first day of the previous year relevant to the assessment year, of - (i) its paid-up share capital; (i...
Tag this Judgment!