http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 9
PETITIONER: THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,BIHAR AND ORISSA
Vs.
RESPONDENT: SRI RAMAKRISHNA DEO
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 14/10/1958
BENCH: AIYYAR, T.L. VENKATARAMA BENCH: AIYYAR, T.L. VENKATARAMA GAJENDRAGADKAR, P.B. SARKAR, A.K.
CITATION: 1959 AIR 239 1959 SCR Supl. (1) 176 CITATOR INFO : R 1965 SC 568 (12)
ACT: Income Tax-Forest trees-Income from sale of-Whether agricultural income-Exemption from taxation-Burden of proof- Findings of the Tribunal-When binding on High Court-Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 (XI Of 1922), SS. 2(1), 4(3) (viii), 66(1).
HEADNOTE: The respondent, the proprietor of an estate, derived income from the sale of trees growing in his forests and claimed that it was agricultural income as defined in s. 2(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, and that it was exempt from payment of income-tax under s. 4(3)(viii). The Appellate Tribunal found that the evidence to show that there was plantation by the estate authorities was meagre and unsubstantial, that the trees in question must have been of spontaneous growth and that the respondent had failed to establish facts on which he could claim exemption. On reference, the High Court took the view that though trees in the forest had not been planted by the estate authorities, the latter had performed subsequent operations of a subst...