RAMCHANDRA DEV Vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) -

(2.) THIS is a reference under Section 66(3), Indian Income-tax Act, made by the Commissioner of Income-tax, Bihar and Orissa.

(3.) THE Commissioner was of opinion tat interest on arrears of rent was not rent and, therefore, could not be regarded as agricultural income. He railed upon a recent Calcutta case, Sheikh Eusuf v, Jitendra Nath Roy (1924) 38 C. W. N. 184., in which it was held that interest payable on rent either under a contract or under the law is not rent as defined in the Bengal Tenancy Act and a separate suit for interest only is not maintainable as a rent suit under the Bengal Tenancy Act. THE Beach which decided that case appears to have been of opinion that a difference existed between cases in which interest in claimed with rent and cases where interest on rent alone is Tenancy Act, but it was not maintainable if interest alone was sued for. the rent, then he suit was maintainable as a rent suit under the Bengal Tenancy Act, but it was not maintainable if interest alone was used for. Even assuming that interest on arrears of rent cannot be regarded as rent under the Bengal Tenancy Act, yet that does not decide the question whether it is agricultural income as that term is defined in the Indian Income-tax Act.