RAJ KUMAR GIRRAJ SINGH Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Agricultural Income -Tax Board, Uttar Pradesh, as made these three references Under Sec. 24 of the Agricultural Income -Tax Act. The question which arises in all the three references is the same and is as follows: -

(2.) It appears that the Assessees at whose instance the reference has been made to this Court, effected sales of Khair trees of village Solanpur and derived income therefrom, and the question arose whether that income fell within Cl. (a) or Cl. (b) of S. 2(1) of the Act. The view taken by the AITB was that the income fel u/Cl. (a) aforesaid and not Cl. (b) and therefore had to be determined in accordance with S. 5 of the Act and was not to be computed Under Sec. 6 of the Act.

(3.) Before we quote the relative provisions, it may be stated that it was not in dispute before the AIT Board that the income derived from the sale of the Khair trees in question was agricultural income. It appears from the order of the Board that Kaththa is made from Khair tries. It appears that the trees sold were not of spontaneous growth, but were planted.