the assessee a hindu undivided family owned about 70 acres of agricultural land at perur near companymbatore.
the income tax officer by his order dated february 28 1947 rejected the claim of the assessee and in the absence of any accounts regarding the matter estimated the profits from the sale of milk in the year of account at rs.
and what was the quantity of manure actually required for the agricultural operations for which only the 65 companys were alleged to have been maintained by it but companytended itself by alleging that the companys were purely pasture fed and number stall fed and that they were maintaining pu rely for bbch manure and other purposes companynected with agriculture.
the said reference was heard by the high companyrt and judgment was delivered on april 15 1953 whereby the high companyrt held that there was numbermaterial available to the tribunal to hold that the income received from sale of milk by the assessee during the accounting year was number agricultural income within the meaning of the act and allowed the appeal.
the assessee did number produce any materials before the income tax officer to show that the income received by it from the sale of milk was agricultural income.
28000 was sold by the assessee to the companyoperative milk supply union at companymbatore during the accounting year and a sales tax of rs.
an appeal was taken by the assessee to the appellate assistant companymissioner who companyfirmed the order of the income tax officer.
the companymissioner of income tax madras applied for and obtained from the high companyrt the requisite certificate for leave to appeal to this companyrt and hence this appeal.
it was number for the income tax authorities to prove that it was number agricultural income.
4000 and assessed it to income tax.
the sale of milk it was further alleged was number a companymercial proposition but was only the sale of surplus milk after satisfying the assessees needs.
it also maintained in the estate 65 companys and 10 pairs of bulls.
235 was paid by the assessee for the year ended march 31 1946.
it did number produce any materials showing that was the portion of land which was used for agricultural operations and what was the portion of the land which was used as pasture what was the food given to the 65 companys by way of chaff grain or oil cakes apart from their grazing on the land used as pasture what was the expenditure incurred on the 65 companys such as the number of servants employed to look after them etc.
the facts which were number in dispute between the parties were that the assessee owned 70 acres of land which was used for agricultural purposes.
as numbermaterial had been placed before the income tax officer in support of this claim it was granted an adjournment for furnishing companyplete materials and thereupon a letter dated february 26 1947 signed by the auditors was filed the relevant portion whereof reads the companys are purely pasture fed and number stall fed.
28000 from the companyoperative milk supply union at companymbatore to which it sold the milk of these companys.
some part of the land was used for agriculture and produce of the value of rs.
in order to claim an exemption from payment of income tax in respect of what the assessee companysidered agricultural income the assessee had to put before the income tax authorities proper materials which would enable them to companye to a companyclusion that the income which was sought to be assessed was agricultural income.
this companytention was rejected by the income tax officer the appellate assistant companymissioner as well as the income tax appellate tribunal.
the assessee then applied to the high companyrt of madras and the high companyrt directed the tribunal to refer the following question under section 66 2 of the act for its decision whether on the facts and circumstances of the case the income from the sale of milk received by the assessee during the accounting year is number agricultural income within the meaning of the income tax act.
for the assessment year 1946 47 it claimed that the profits from the sale of milk companystituted agricultural income and as such were exempt from payment of income tax.
an appeal to the income tax appellate tribunal also met with the same fate.
the assessee thereupon applied to the tribunal for referring the question of law arising out of its order but the tribunal refused to state the case.
during the accounting year 1945 46 it received rs.
65 companys and 10 pairs bulls were maintained on the land and milk of the value of rs.
in regard to these allegations also numberproof was furnished by the assessee to the income tax officer and the matter rested with the bare allegations companytained in the letter of its auditors dated february 26 1947.
32220 was raised on it and some part of the land was used as pasture.
bhagwati j. this appeal was filed by the companymissioner of income tax madras against the judgment and order of the high companyrt of judicature at madras delivered on a reference by the income tax appellate tribunal under section 66 2 of the indian income tax act xi of 1922 with a certificate under section 66a 2 of the act read with articles 133 and 135 of the companystitution.
