BHANDARI, J. - (1.) THESE two references, which have been made by the Appellate Tribunal, Agricultural Income Tax, under sec. 86 (2) of the Rajasthan Agricultural Income Tax Act, 1953, raise an identical question arising in almost similar circumstances and we propose to dispose them by this order. The previous year of the assessee (non-applicant in Reference No. 23 of 1958) according to his method of accounting and as opted by him, ended on 26th July each year. The agricultural income in the hands of the assessee which accrued to him from 1. 4. 1953 became liable to tax as the Rajasthan Agricultural Income Tax Act (Act XXXIII of 1953) (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") came into force on 1. 4. 1953. The Agricultural Income Tax Officer while assessing the tax payable by the assessee computed tax on the entire income from 27. 7. 1952 to 26. 7. 1953, and demanded tax proportionately for a period of about 4 months from 1. 4. 1953 to 26. 7. 1953. The assessee preferred an appeal and the Assistant Commissioner, Agricultural Income Tax agreed with method of computation adopted by the Agricultural Income Tax Officer and rejected the assessee's appeal. Another appeal to the Appellate Tribunal, Agricultural Income Tax was preferred and the Tribunal accepted the assessee's contention and held that it was only the agricultural income that accrued to the assessee from 1. 4. 1953 to 26. 7. 1953 which was liable to be taken into account both for purposes of tax and rate. The department moved the Tribunal for making this reference and it is in these circumstances that this reference has come to us. The question which has been referred to us is as follows: - "whether in the case under reference: - (a) Only the actual agricultural income of the period from 1st April, 1953 to 26th July, 1953 should be taken into account both for the purposes of determining the rate of tax and the amount to be taxed at that rate Or (b) the tiotal agricultural income of the previous year from the 27the July, 1952 to 26th July, 1953 should be taken into account for determining the rate of tax and the actual income of the period from 1st April, 1953 to 26 July, 1953 should then be assessed at the rate thus determined. "
(2.) IN Reference No. 24 of 1958 of the two assesses Shri Himmat Singh of Kalu and Nahar Singh of Auwa, the accounting year ended on the 30th Sept. , 1953. IN both these assessments, the Agricultural INcome Tax Officer and the Assistant Commissioner adop;ed the method of ascertaining the entire income of the assesses between 1. 10. 1952 to 30. 11. 1953 and after calculating the rate payable by the assessees demanded a proportionate tax for the income which accrued between 1. 4. 1953 to 30. 9. 1953. The Appellate Tribunal accepting the assessee's appeal held as in Reference No. 23 of 1958 that for both rate and tax it was the income which accrued to the assessees from 1. 4. 1953 to 3 3. 9. 195 3 on which they were liable to pay the tax. The department in these two cases also asked the Appellate Tribunal to make a reference and it is how Reference No. 24 of 1958 comes before us with the following question : - "whether in the case under reference: - (a) Only the actual agricultural income of the period from 1st April, 1953 to 30th Sept. 1953, should be taken into account both for the purposes of determining the rate of tax and the amount to be taxed at that rate. Or (b) the total agricultural income of the previous year from October 1, 1952 to September 30, 1953 should be taken into account for determining the rate of tax and the actual income of the period from 1st April, 1953 to 30th September, 1953 should then be assessed at the rate thus determined. " The relevant provisions to be considered in this connection are contained in secs. 3 and 4 of the Act which are, as follows: - "sec. 33: - Charge of Agricultural Income Tax.- Agricultural Income - tax shall be charged for each financial year in accordance with and subject to the. provisions of this Act on the total agricultural income of the previous year of every person. " "sec. 4 - Limits of taxable income and rates of tax: Agricultural income-tax shall be payable by a person whose total agricultural income of the previous year exceeds Rs. 6,000 at such rate or rates as may be laid down from year to year, by the Annual Finance Act. Provided that the tax at the rate or rates specified in the First Schedule shall be charged on the total agricultural income accruing to every person during the financial year commencing on the 1st April, 1953," Sec. 3 of the Act is the charging section and the total agricultural income of the previous year of every person is made liable to agricultural income-tax for each financial year. It is common ground between the parties that the previous year of the assessee commenced and ended on the dates mentioned in the earlier part of the order. It is also conceded by the learned Government Advocate that the inepme chargeable was that which accrued to the assessee from 1. 4. 1953 and income which might have accrued to him before that date, was not chargeable. Now the rate or rates, according to which the agricultural income-tax is to be payable, is laid down in sec. 4. For the assessment year 1954-55 no rates were prescribed by the Finance Act and the first proviso to sec. 4 is to govern the rate or rates for that year. It lays down that the rate or rates specified in the First Schedule shall be charged on the total agricultural income accruing to the assessee during the financial year commencing from 1. 4. 1953. It has Been argued by the learned Government Advocate that in accordance, with this proviso to sec. 4 the tax is to be levied on the whole of the income of the assessee during the financial year commencing from the Ist of April 1953 and ending on the 31st of March 1954 according to the Schedule, and after the 31st of March 1954 tax is to be levied in accordance with the main sec. This contention is different from the two alternatives suggested in questions before us. The Tribunal has actually assessed in the manner referred to in 'a' part of the question which is that the actual income from the Ist of April 1953 to the end of the previous year was taken into account and then the rate mentioned in the First Schedule of the Act was applied for the purpose of determining the tax to which the assessee was liable. In 'b' part of the question, the alternative suggested is that the total agricultural income of the previous year is to be taken into account and then the tax is to be determined in accordance with Schedule and from this the average rate of tax is calculated and applied for taxing the actual income from the Ist of April 1953 to the end of the previous year. The learned Government advocate has suggested a third method which according to him is correct method under the provisions of sec. 3 and 4 of the Act. The proviso to sec. 4 is not worded in a very happy language as it is somewhat vague in case where the assessee chooses the previous year which may be different from the financial year i. e. if it commences from any other date than the 1st of April. If the year commences from the 1st of April, there is no difficulty in the interpretation of the proviso, as, according to it, the rate or rates specified in the First Schedule will be made applicable to the whole of the income from the 1st of April, 1953 to the 31st of March, 1954, but the difficulty arises when the year of the assessee commences from any date other than the 1st of April, 1953. The main provision contained in sec. 4 will apply to the assessment year or years for which rates have been fixed by the Annual Finance Act. The Raj. Finance Agricultural Income Tax Act, 1955 (Act No. VII of 1955) provided, for the rates of agricultural income to be charged for the financial year commencing from the 1st of April, 1955. For the year 1954-55, there was no provision made anywhere in any Finance Act. When the main provision to sec. 4 does not apply, it is proviso which must be reported to. This proviso says that it is the income from the 1st of April, 1953 which is liable to be taxed and not any other agricultural income that might have accrued to the assessee before that date. Even if the previous year of the assessee does not commence from the 1st of April, 1953, the income to be taken in consideration for the purpose of the assessment will be that which accrued to the assessee after the 1st of April, 1953 and there is no room for taking the view propounded in 'b' part of this question that the total agricultural income of the assessee of the whole of the previous year is to be taken into account and applying the rate or rates given in the Schedule, the to:al tax on that income is to be determined and then the average rate of the tax is to be found out and that average rate is to be applied to the actual income received from the 1st of April, 1953 to the end of the previous year. If such were the intention of the Legislature, it could have been expressed in more definite and precise language. From the language used in this proviso, we are unable to gather that such a complicated system as-suggested in 'b' part of the question, was intended to be laid down. Coming to the position taken up by the learned Government Advocate, we are of the opinion that though it appears to be plausible on the literal construction of the language of the proviso, it must be rejected as the interpretation suggested by him nullifies the right of the assessee in the matter of option of the previous year given to him under the law. Sec. 2 (17) of the Act gives an option to the assessee to choose his previous year. Under Sec. 3 of the Act, agricultural income tax is to be charged for each financial year on the total agricultural income of the previous year of every person. Sec. 3 is the main charging section while Sec. 4 lays down the limits of taxable income and the rates of tax. The first proviso to sec. 4 cannot govern or nullify sec. 3 under which the total agricultural income of the previous year of a person is to be taxed. Again, under the main provision of sec. 4, agricultural income-tax is payable by a person at such rate or rates as may be laid down from year to year by the Annual Finance Act. The first proviso to that section was enacted for the purpose of making provision when no rate or rates were laid down for any year by the Finance Act. The proviso is therefore in the nature of a supplementary provision for recovering tax for the assessment year 1954-55 on the agricultural income accruing to a person from the 1st of April, 1953, and does not over-ride the main section which must be resorted to if it is applicable. It may also be pointed out that the words used in the proviso arc that "the total agricultural income accruing to a person during the year commencing on the 1st of April 1953" is to be taxed at the rate or rates assessed by the First Schedule. The word 'during' does not necessarily convey the whole of the year from the 1st of April 1953 to the 31st of March, 1954, but may include only a part of the year if the previous year of the assessee ends on any date before the 31st of March, 1954, and the assessee is liable to pay the tax from that date under the main provision of sec. 4. This being the position, we are of opinion that the actual agricultural income of the assessee from the 1st of April, 1953, up to the 26th of July in Reference No. 23 of 1958 and up to the 30th of September, 1953, in Reference No. 24 of 1958 should be taken into account for assessing the assessees and taxed at the rate or rates specified in the First Schedule, as has been done by the Tribunal and as is contemplated in 'a' part of the question and the assessee cannot be taxed as suggested in 'b' part of the question. The view taken by the Appellate Tribunal Agricultral Income Tax is the correct view and these two references are answered accordingly. We make no order as to costs in both the cases , . ;