Skip to content


Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. T. Manavedan Tirumalpad - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtChennai
Decided On
Judge
Reported in126Ind.Cas.596
AppellantCommissioner of Income-tax
RespondentT. Manavedan Tirumalpad
Excerpt:
income tax act (xi of 1922), section 6 - income derived from sale of timber trees, whether liable to income tax. - .....referred to us by the commissioner of income-tax is:whether the amounts received by sale of timber-trees are income, liable as such, to income-tax.2. the assessee is the owner of unassessed forest lands in malabar and was assessed by the income tax officer, palghat, for the year 1923 1929 on an income of rs. 5,395 from property and rs. 3,07,629 from fees received in respect of timber cut and removed from the forests and other miscellaneous receipts. the assessee objects to the latter assessment. before the commissioner his contention was that he had purchased the forests with trees growing therein and that as the trees were cut down and carried away the capital was thereby decreased. the commissioner of income-tax has pointed out that similar circumstances exist in the case of.....
Judgment:

1. The question referred to us by the Commissioner of Income-tax is:

Whether the amounts received by sale of timber-trees are income, liable as such, to income-tax.2. The assessee is the owner of unassessed forest lands in Malabar and was assessed by the Income Tax Officer, Palghat, for the year 1923 1929 on an income of Rs. 5,395 from property and Rs. 3,07,629 from fees received in respect of timber cut and removed from the forests and other miscellaneous receipts. The assessee objects to the latter assessment. Before the Commissioner his contention was that he had purchased the forests with trees growing therein and that as the trees were cut down and carried away the capital was thereby decreased. The Commissioner of Income-tax has pointed out that similar circumstances exist in the case of mines and quarries--this is conceded by Mr. Venkatarama Sastri who appears for the assessee--and that in neither of those cases is any deduction allowed by reason of the fact that as years go on the amount of coal under the land in the case of the mines is diminished and the amount of stones to be quarried in the case of the quarry is diminished. Similar views have been taken in the English Courts with regard to minerals, Mr. Venkaterama Sastri here argues that this is not to be treated as assessable income at all, although ha admits that he can see no difference between the income derived from the sale of coal and the sale of stone quarried in a quarry or from income derived from the sale of paddy grown on land. Of course, we are unable to distinguish between the income derived from the sale of paddy which is grown on land and the income derived from the sale of timber cut in a forest; but the profits earned from the sale of paddy would be assessable to income-tax but for the special exemption given to that income in the Income Tax Act by reason of its being agricultural income. There is no such exemption in the case of income derived from the sale of timber. Under the circumstances, we answer the question referred to us in the affirmative. The assessee will pay Es. 250 costs to the Com missioner of Income-tax.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //