COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX Vs. KAMAKHYA NARAYAN SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE four appeals are brought from judgments of the High Court of Judicature at Patna whereby four separate references made to that Court under Section 66 (2) of the India.) Income-tax Act, 1922, as amended, were answered in favour of the assessees, the respondents to the several appeals.

(2.) ALL appeals raise the question whether interest on arrears of rent payable in in respect of land used for agricultural purposes is exempt from income-tax as being agricultural income within the definition of that phrase contained in Section 2 (7) of the [ndian Income-tax Act. In the second appeal a further question is raised to which their Lordships will refer later.

(3.) THERE is a diversity of judicial opinion as to the correct answer to this question. The High Court of Calcutta (cf. In re Badhika Mohan Roy's Estate [1941] A. I. R. Cal. 443) and the High Court of Madras (cf. Prethaperumal Chettiar v. Commissioner of Income-Tar, Madras [1944] Mad. 332) have answered this question in the negative. The High Court of Allahabad (cf. Sarju Bai v. Commr. of Inc. Tax (1946) 15 I. T. R. 137) and the High Court of Patna (of Srimati Lakshmi Daiji v. Commr, of Inc. Tax (1944) 12 I. T. R. 309) and the cases here under review have answered it in the affirmative.