HAJI LATIF ABDULLAH Vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE following questions of law have been referred :

(2.) THE assessee deals in tendu (bidi) leaves which are used, to roll up tobacco in the manufacture of bidis. THE said leaves grow in forests. THE assessee took on lease certain forests from the State Government, the then Indian Native States, zamindaries and malguzaries, for the purpose of its business. THE assessee conceded before us that pollarding was not an agricultural operation but contended that coppicing was so. As to what is coppicing operation will appear according to the statement of the assessee set out at p. 93 of the paper-book and counsel for the assessee relied on items Nos. marked 1, 2, 5; 6 and 7.

(3.) COUNSEL for the CIT contended, first, that the Tribunal found as a fact that the operations described as coppicing were not operations on the land and were not therefore agricultural operations within the meaning of s. 2(1) of the IT Act, and, secondly, that the coppicing operations claimed by the assessee to be agricultural operations were not so, in view of the recent decisions of the Supreme Court to which I shall now refer.