It was on the basis that capital gains accrued to the assessees when old and uneconomic rubber trees were sold by them.
12571 and 12572/93 in this Court.
208 and 209 of 1987 by judgment dated 19th September, 1989, agreed with the finding of the Income tax Appellate Tribunal to the effect that the fair market value of the old and uneconomic rubber trees, as they were in 1954 or later in 1964, as the case may be, will be either equal or higher than the sale price it fetched at the time of the relevant sale, which took place later during the relevant accounting year, and that numbercapital gains arose when such old and unyielding rubber trees were sold.
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in a majority of cases, accepted the plea of the assessees, and directed the Revenue to delete the capital gains on the sale of old and uneconomic rubber trees.
208 and 208 of 1987 regarding the assessability of capital gains, when a plantation companypany sold old uneconomic rubber trees.
The High Court also took the view that capital gains arose or accrued when old and uneconomic rubber trees were sold by the various assessees.
An identical question arose before the High Court of Kerala in ITR.Nos.
The plea put forward by the assessees was that the rubber trees when sold were uneconomic and unyielding and were useless, but on the other hand, they were fully yielding on the respective valuation date specified in Section 55 2 of the Act, i.e., 1.1,1954 or 1.1964, as the case may be, and in this view of the matter, numbercapital gains arose or accrued to the assessees when the old and unyielding rubber trees were sold.
159 160/88, the question whether rubber replantation subsidy received by the assessee from the Rubber Board is income, was also companysidered and it was held that it cannot be said to be revenue receipt and taxed.
Arising out of SLP C Nos.11042/88, 11058/88, 11068/88, 11118 19/88, 11446 47/88, 11740 42/88, 12300/87 12599 600/87, 12603 4/87, 13321/88, 13937 38/88, 14071/88, 14072/88, 14073/88, 15594 95/88, 15685/88, 15742 43/88, 15744 45/88 and 15747/88.
Against the above said decision, the Revenue filed SLPs Nos.
In a few cases there is delay in filing the special leave petitions, The said delay is companydoned.
WITH CIVIL APPEAL NOS 9191 9203,9205 9220 OF 1996.
159 and 160 of 1988 dated 30.1.1991 and also in ITR No.2/1988 dated 9.1.1991 for the assessment Year 1980 81 has held that replantation subsidy received by the Planters from Rubber Board can number be held to be revenue receipt and taxed as income in view of its decision of the High Court in the case of Rubby Rubber Works Limited 178 ITR 181 .
A Division Bench of the Kerala High Court in ITR Nos.
In ITR Nos.
The same view was taken by the High Court vide its judgment dated 30.1.1991 in ITR Nor.159 160/88 Commissioner of Income Tax, Cochin vs. Malavalam Plantations India Ltd., Cochin.
During the accounting years relevant to the assessment years in question for which they were assessed 1958 69, 1969 70, 1971 72, 1972 73, 1973 74, 1974 75, 1975 76, 1976 77, 1977 78 and 1978 79, as the case may be , the assessees sold old, unyielding and uneconomic rubber trees The Income Tax Officer, brought to tax the difference in amount between the sale price of the uneconomic rubber trees sold and the price nationally fixed for rubber trees as on 1.1.1954 and 1.1.1964, as the case may be S. 55 2 .
The principle adopted to arrive at the capital gains was also assailed.
The basis or principle on which capital gains was worked out by the officer was interfered with by the Appellate Tribunal.
Ltd. v. C.I.T. 184 ITR 1 wherein the same view was taken.
This Court J.S. Verma and S.P. Bharucha, JJ.
In the said decision, the Court referred to a few unreported cases and also the reported decision in Kanthimathy Plantations Pvt.
Aggrieved by the judgments rendered by the High Court on the above two aspects 1 assessment of capital gains tax when old and uneconomic rubber trees were sold, and 2 holding that rubber replantation subsidy is a revenue receipt and so companyld be taxed as income, the assessees filed the special leave petitions in this Court, which have resulted in the appeals.
J U D G M E N T PARIPOORNAN, J. Special leave granted in all the cases.
on 23.7.1993 dismissed the said SLPs on merits 203 ITR Statutes p.2 .
In doing so, the High Court followed the earlier decision in Commissioner of Income tax v. Ruby Rubber Works Ltd. 178 ITR 181 F.B. Pointedly referring to the above subsequent events, in the companynter affidavit filed by the Revenue in SLP Nos.15594 95/95 Harrison Malayalam Ltd. vs. C.I.T. available at pages 96 to 104, at pages 101 102 it is stated thus In this companynection, it is submitted that in the assessees own case for the assessment years 1977 78, 1978 79, the High Court in its order in ITR Nos.
He worked out the capital gains on the basis of a principle stated in his order.
