Bhagwati - (1.) THE Judgment of the court was delivered by -
(2.) THESE six appeals with certificates of fitness under S. 66A (2) of the Indian Income Tax Act (Act XI of 1922) are directed against a common judgment and order passed by the full bench of the High court of Judicature in Assam delivered on a consolidated Reference by the Income Tax Appellate tribunal under s. 66 (1) of the Act whereby Sarjoo Prasad C. J. and Ram Labhaya J. answered the referred question in the affirmative and Deka J. answered it in the negative. The referred question was : "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of this case the receipts from the sale of sal trees can be said to be agricultural Income under S. 2 (1) and exempt from taxation under S. 4 (3) (VIII) of the Income Tax Act." These appeals were consolidated and the High court ordered that a consolidated amount of security of Rs. 4,000.00 together with one set of printing costs be deposited by the appellant, the Commissioner of Income, tax, Assam. The appellant filed one statement of case but the respondents in the six appeals filed separate statements of case each one of them. Smt. Jyotikana Chowdhurani, the respondent in Civil Appeal NO. 51 of 1956, is the widow and legal representative of the late Jyotsna Nath Choudhury who was a co-sharer and proprietor of the Mechpara Estate situate in the District of Goalpara in the State of Assam. The said estate is assessed to land revenue payable to the State of Assam and is also subject to local rates assessed and collected by the officers of the Assam government. The said estate has vast areas of forest tracts, considerable portions of which are covered mainly by Sal trees. The trees in the forests are of spontaneous growth and there was no planting or sowing or employment of any human agency for the purpose of tilling the soil. The late Rai Sourindra Narayan Sinha Chowdhury father of Shri Jyotirindra Narayan Sinha Choudhury was a co-sharer of "Parbat Joar Estate", and had been assessed by the Income-tax Officer in the year 1923 on receipts from the sale of sal trees from his forest as income within the meaning of the Indian Income Tax Act. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax on appeal held by his order dated 28/04/1923, that receipts from forests were agricultural income and the Income Tax Authorities accepted the said decision and ceased to assess such receipts for a good number of years.
(3.) ON 17/12/1946, the said Jyotsna Nath Chowdhury was assessed for the year 1946-47 20 to income on his receipts from the sale of Sal trees from his forests by the Income Tax Officer, Gauhati. An Appeal filed, by him against the said order of assessment failed and so did a further appeal filed by him to the Income Tax Appellate tribunal, Calcutta. He thereupon asked for a reference by the Income Tax Appellate tribunal of certain questions of law arising out of its order under S. 66 (1) of the Indian Income Tax Act. The tribunal drew up a common statement of case in regard to the assessments of the said Jyotsna Math Chowdhury as also the other respondents in the appeals before us and referred the question set out above to the High court for its opinion. The said reference was heard by a Special bench of the Assam High court with the result indicated above. Birendra Narayana Choudhury, the respondent in C. A. no. 58 of 1996 was a co-sharer proprietor of the same estate. He also was assessed on 17/12/1946, to income-tax on his receipts from the sale of sal trees from his forests for the year 1946-47 by the Income Tax Officer, Gauhati. The appeals filed by him before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Calcutta "B" Range and the Income Tax Appellate tribunal were also dismissed. The latter however referred the same question to the High court under s. 66 (1) of the Indian Income Tax Act, at his instance. Shrimati Sulochana Chowdhury, the respondent in civil Appeal NO. 59 of 1956 is the legal representative of the late Jagadindra Narayan Chowdhury who was a co-sharer proprietor of the Parbat.Joar and Mechpara estates within the district of Goalpara in Assam. On March 24, 1947, the said Jagadindra Narayan Chowdhury was assessed to income-tax on his receipts from the sale of Sal trees from his forests for the year 1946-47 by the Income Tax Officer, Gauhati. He preferred an appeal before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Calcutta, "B" Range but died daring the pendency of the said appeal and was succeeded by his mother the respondent. The Appellate Income Tax Commissioner, Calcutta B Range by his order dated 15/03/1948, reduced the assessment. The respondent preferred an appeal against the said order of the Appellate tribunal which dismissed the appeal. The same question was referred by the Income Tax Appellate tribunal to the High court for its opinion under S. 66 (1) of the Indian Income Tax Act at the instance of the respondent. ;