VAZHAKKALA ESTATES PVT. LTD. Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a revision filed by an assessee to agricultural Income Tax. The revision is filed under Section 78 of the Kerala Agricultural Income Tax Act, 1991. The respondent is the Revenue. The assessee assails the order passed in revision by the Commissioner of Agricultural Income Tax, Thiruvananthapuram, dated December 16, 1992, affirming the order of assessment passed by the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner, Agricultural Income Tax and Sales Tax, Kottayam, dated September 18, 1990. We are concerned with the assessment year 1985 -86, for which the previous year ended on March 31, 1985,

(2.) THE petitioner -assessee is a private limited company. It reported for the particular assessment year a total loss of Rs. 1,38,686.80. It owned the estates, Graceland Estate and Janasree Estate. The Agricultural Income Tax Officer found that the books of account and the returns cannot be accepted. It was noticed that the account produced was not written in the usual course of business. The accounts were seen written at a stretch in regular intervals. So it was held that the above documents could not be relied upon. It was further noticed that the yield returned from the estate was very low. Similarly, for Keezhar and Parayankulam Estates, the yield from slaughter tapping as returned by the assessee was not accepted. The assessing authority referred to the preassessment notice dated December 11, 1989, as also the subsequent notice dated April 20, 1990, and held that the income returned from slaughter tapping in Keezhar and Parayankulam Estates cannot be accepted and that the income thereon will be estimated. The reason stated was that the average income from slaughter tapping comes only to Rs. 19 per tree. On the other hand, in similar other estates nearby, the average income from slaughter tapping returned is much more and there are other similar cases also. The average value of a tree given for slaughter tapping by the assessee worked out to Rs. 47, whereas, in similar cases, viz., Padinjarekara Estate Limited, it worked out to Rs. 234 per tree and similar other cases showed Rs. 210. On that basis, the income from slaughter tapping was fixed reckoning the average value of the tree as Rs. 210 and the latex value at 2/3 of the above Rs. 140. So, for 1,050 trees, the latex value was fixed at Rs. 1,47,000 and allowing deduction for the tapping expenses at 30 per cent., the balance income was fixed at Rs. 1,02,900. The plea of the assessee that the agreement relating to slaughter tapping should be accepted was negatived for the reason that the agreement was not a registered one and its credibility was open to doubt since the date of issue of the stamp paper is not recorded. Moreover, the plot was inspected by the Agricultural Income Tax Officer, Kottayam, on August 1, 1984, and at that time, the agreement was not produced before the officer. It was for these reasons, the Agricultural Income Tax Officer, by order dated September 18, 1990, fixed the total income from all the trees at Rs. 2,39,240.20 before depreciation and levied tax thereon.

(3.) WE heard counsel for the revision petitioner.