Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 8 of 8 (0.49 seconds)
Documents citing Aitha Narasaiah And Co. And Anr. vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh And Anr. on 30 August, 1978

Shivamoni Steel Tubes Limited vs Joint Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes ... on 29 September, 1997

"Sri Dasaratharama Reddi, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, however, relies upon the decision of a Division Bench of this Court in Aitha Narasaiah & Co. v. State of Andhra Pradesh [1979] 43 STC 183, in respect of his submission that the word "rate" occurring in section 8(2)(a) of the Act, could only mean the amount of tax which becomes actually payable after giving rebate as provided under Explanation III to entries 21 and 22 of the Third Schedule to the Act. We have carefully perused the said decision. There is nothing in the decision which supports the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner."
Karnataka High Court Cites 8 - Cited by 0 - V G Gowda - Full Document

Rajambal vs The Inspector General (Registration) on 22 December, 2011

In G.Narasaiah vs. State of Andhra Pradesh {AIR 2011 AP 101}, a Division Bench of the Andhra Pradesh High Court held that the Revenue Divisional Officer has no right to request the registering authority not to register any document on the ground that there is a title dispute between the inamdhars and the purchaser. But it is not known whether in Andhra Pradesh, there is any enactment corresponding to Tamilnadu Patta Pass Book Act.
Madras High Court Cites 88 - Cited by 6 - V Ramasubramanian - Full Document

Sri Ganesh Trading Company vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 29 March, 1988

8. Sri Dasaratharama Reddi, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, however, relies upon the decision of a Division Bench of this Court in Aitita Narasaiah Co. v. State of Andhra Pradesh [1979] 43 STC 183, in respect of his submission that the word "rate" occurring in section 8(2)(a) of the Act, could only mean the amount of tax which becomes actually payable after giving rebate as provided under Explanation III to entries 21 and 22 of the Third Schedule to the Act. We have carefully perused the said decision. There is nothing in the decision which supports the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner.
Andhra HC (Pre-Telangana) Cites 10 - Cited by 1 - Full Document

The State Of Andhra Pradesh vs Srinivasa Trading Co. on 18 July, 1984

1. This tax revision case is filed against the consolidated order of the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal dated 24th September, 1979. The assessee is a dealer in the purchase of paddy and sale of rice. The assessee purchased paddy within the State of Andhra Pradesh and, after converting the same into rice, sold the resultant rice in the course of inter-State trade. Before the Commercial Tax Officer, the assessee claimed that he is entitled under section 15(c) of the Central Sales Tax Act for the reduction of the amount of tax paid on the purchase of paddy within the State. The Commercial Tax Officer accepted the contention of the assessee and allowed the reduction. The Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes revised the orders of the Commercial Tax Officer holding the view that section 15(c) of the Central Sales Tax Act does not contemplate reduction of tax where the rice is sold in the course of inter-State trade or commerce. Against the order of the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, the assessee filed an appeal before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal. The Tribunal allowed the appeal filed by the assessee following the decision of this Court in Aitha Narasaiah & Co. v. State of Andhra Pradesh [1979] 43 STC 183.
Andhra HC (Pre-Telangana) Cites 4 - Cited by 2 - B P Reddy - Full Document
1