https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=314301 Section 75 of the Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation Act, 2014 was held not to exclude apportionment of assets and liabilities under the Act's separate scheme. The Court read the statute as a whole, holding that continuance of facilities must be harmonised with the apportionment provisions so that no part becomes redundant. It further held that territorial location alone did not justify exclusive control over the council's funds or assets; post-bifurcation collections from Andhra Pradesh districts could not be appropriated by Telangana, while pre-bifurcation assets required equitable division. The freezing of the accounts was therefore unlawful. en-us Fri, 18 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 30 May 2024 20:49:58 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=314301 Section 75 of the Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation Act, 2014 was held not to exclude apportionment of assets and liabilities under the Act's separate scheme. The Court read the statute as a whole, holding that continuance of facilities must be harmonised with the apportionment provisions so that no part becomes redundant. It further held that territorial location alone did not justify exclusive control over the council's funds or assets; post-bifurcation collections from Andhra Pradesh districts could not be appropriated by Telangana, while pre-bifurcation assets required equitable division. The freezing of the accounts was therefore unlawful. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 18 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=314301