SUNNY KURIAKOSE Vs. COMMISSIONER OF AGRICULTURAL INCOME TAX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WE are required to consider the following two questions with regard to the application of the provisions of Section 9(2)(iv) of the Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1950 :

(2.) THE position is more than simplified by reason of consistent findings of the authorities below which are more than difficult for learned counsel to contest in this proceeding under Section 60 of the Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1950. A brief resume of the facts would not be out of place. THE assessee is a rubber estate owner called Kasthuri Estate at Peringamala village in Nedumangad laluk. He is blind.

(3.) THIS factual position gets reaffirmed in the conclusions of the Tribunal. It is to the effect that the purchase of the property was effected by the applicant himself for his minor child, Anitha, and that the consideration in regard thereto proceeded from the assessee only and from none else. The Tribunal has also clarified that the certificate would not have any weight in preference to the contents of the registered sale deed.