9911796707
TMI Blog1971 (1) TMI 14X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1357, 1358 and 1359, the two lessees appointed a common manager for cultivation of the land. The manager maintained a common account of expenditure and income, kept the profits joint and later divided them between the two lessees according to their respective area. In the proceeding for assessment of the income received by the lessees to agricultural income-tax, it was claimed by the two lessees that the income was their separate income-tax was liable to be assessed separately. The Income-tax Officer upheld the plea and separately assessed the tax. The Commissioner of Agricultural Income-tax disagreed with that view and assessed the income of the two lessees as income of an association of individuals. That order of the Commissioner was con ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ther the association of individuals held property ; and, thirdly, whether the land was held in any of the capacities mentioned in the definition of the expression " person " in section 2(11) of the U. P. Agricultural Income-tax Act. The High Court held on the first branch, that there was an association of persons, on the second, that there was a holding of land by an association of men, and, on the third, that the land was not held by the association as owner, trustee, receiver, manager, administrator or executor, or in any other capacity recognised by law, as partnership, company or local authority, and, on that ground, answered the question in the negative. We may assume in these appeals that because they appointed a common manager for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sideration the fact that one owned 316.3 acres and the other 326.1 acres. By pooling their lands together they eliminated the distinction between one holding 316.2 acres and the other holding 326.1 acres ; each allowed the other to hold the land belonging to him. " In our view, these observations of the High Court are not supported by the findings recorded by the Board of Agricultural Income-tax. The only facts found by the Board are that the lessees had appointed a common manager, that common accounts were maintained, and that the net profits, after deducting from the receipts, expenditure for management of the lands under the two leases, were divided. In our view, the conclusion recorded by the High Court that the lessees as an associat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
