Skip to content


Commissioner of Agricultural Income-tax, Madras Vs. L. K. G. Private Ltd. Ootacamund. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectDirect Taxation
CourtChennai High Court
Decided On
Case NumberTax Case No. 290 of 1967 (Revision No. 165)
Reported in[1969]71ITR370(Mad)
AppellantCommissioner of Agricultural Income-tax, Madras
RespondentL. K. G. Private Ltd. Ootacamund.
Excerpt:
- .....satisfied that the tribunal is correct. the expenditure related to lopping of excess growth of the shade trees in the plantation in order to that there may be proper shade and at the same time enough sunlight. the tribunal rightly held that such expenditure was obviously in connection with the maintenance of shade trees in proper condition to see that maximum benefit is obtained from such shade trees. it may be, as it is contended for the state, that once the branches are cut, they are fit for sale and may actually be sold. even then, it will be a question whether the receipt by sale will be agricultural income or would be in the nature of a capital. that does not fall to be decided at the moment. it is enough to say that it is to earn agricultural income, and in the process of.....
Judgment:

VEERASWAMI J. - The Tribunal allowed a sum of Rs. 8,346 as a deduction and it is the correctness of this view that is canvassed by the State in the tax case. We are satisfied that the Tribunal is correct. The expenditure related to lopping of excess growth of the shade trees in the plantation in order to that there may be proper shade and at the same time enough sunlight. The Tribunal rightly held that such expenditure was obviously in connection with the maintenance of shade trees in proper condition to see that maximum benefit is obtained from such shade trees. It may be, as it is contended for the State, that once the branches are cut, they are fit for sale and may actually be sold. Even then, it will be a question whether the receipt by sale will be agricultural income or would be in the nature of a capital. That does not fall to be decided at the moment. It is enough to say that it is to earn agricultural income, and in the process of agricultural operation, the expenditure has been been incurred.

The petition is dismissed.


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