1994 (10) TMI 23

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ompel reference of the following question stated to be of law arising out of the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench. The assessing authority brought to assessment an amount of Rs. 91,536 which the assessee had received from the Tea Board as subsidy for rejuvenation of the tea plantation. According to the Assessing Officer, though subsidy given for planting, replanting and rep .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e object of the scheme of rejuvenation is to improve the tea production from the existing old and uneconomic tea areas within the shortest possible time by arresting deterioration of the existing tea bushes and by increase of the bush population with the use of better planting materials. The subsidy was given subject to conditions laid down by the Tea Board. It is evident that this subsidy was i .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... observations at page 873 of that report to contend that any receipt, even if it be of a capital nature, was income. The Supreme Court relied for this purpose on section 10(3). Counsel, therefore, stated that the subsidy received must be treated as income and unless it is exempted under any of the provisions of the Income-tax Act, it has to be subjected to tax. Counsel pointed out that section 10(3 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X