MALAYALAM PLANTATIONS LIMITED Vs. AGRI ITAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE following four questions came to be referred to this court by the order under reference :

(2.) HOWEVER, the reference came to be placed before the Full Bench by an order of reference dated June 4, 1992. Accordingly, the Full Bench answered the first two questions, question No. 1 in the negative being against the Revenue and in favour of the assessee, whereas question No. 2 in the affirmative--in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. The Full Bench left questions Nos. 3 and 4 for our decision and for this purpose, the questions are required to be settled.

(3.) IT must be stated that what is received is an amount of compensation with regard to the cutting of the trees. IT must be seen that as far as the commodity collected as a result of the cutting, the assessee has received compensation and has lost possession of the said property which was collected by the Board. IT has to be appreciated that as far as the property for which the assessee received compensation, the property is lost and it is, therefore, compensation is paid and received for the said loss. We have carefully gone through the decision of the Calcutta High Court and we could not be persuaded by the reasoning, only on the strength of the observation that the source of compensation is the land itself and as far as the payment of compensation is concerned, it is directly associated with the land itself.