RANI RATNESH KUMARI Vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE question referred for our opinion is :

(2.) THE facts as found by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal in its appellate judgment and as given in the statement of the case show that the assessee was receiving a sum of Rs. 8,947 as Malikana in respect of an estate of 133 villages, which had belonged to her predecessor-in-interest. THE only point that arose was whether this amount, received as Malikana, was agricultural income, and, consequently, exempt from the applicability of the Income-tax Act.

(3.) THIS is further clarified by the subsequent settlement reports, which have been quoted in the appellate judgment of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal. In paragraph 15 of that judgment is quoted the settlement report of 1870 and in that this Malikana received by the then Raja is described as a money allowance in each village calculated at 22 1/4 per cent. on the Jamma and 18 per cent. on the net estimated assets. THIS settlement report proceeds further to say that the Raja claimed to have this set aside and required engagement to be taken with himself. But this claim was rejected. THIS report again makes it clear that the Raja was receiving an allowance calculated at a particular rate by virtue of the engagement entered into under the settlement and was not actually receiving a share of the rents to revenue of the villages.