9911796707
TMI Blog1996 (1) TMI 110X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, and espe cially in view of the nature of the expenditure is not the entire expen diture on Data Processing Centre an allowable deduction ? 3. Whether the expenses for audit of the company's accounts as provided under the provisions of the Companies Act being a part of the management expenses, is an allowable deduction ? 4. Whether the compensation received by the assessee from the Kerala State Electricity Board for cutting their rubber trees in the plantation is agricultural income assessable under the Agricultural Income-tax Act ? " However, the reference came to be placed before the Full Bench by an order of reference dated June 4, 1992. Accordingly, the Full Bench answered the fir ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s for audit of the company's accounts, which will have to be accepted as expenses being a part of the management expenses and as such would be an allowable deduction. We answer question No. 3 accordingly in the affirmative-in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. We regard to question No. 4, the question is with regard to the compensation received by the assessee from the Kerala State Electricity Board for the requirement of cutting of the rubber trees in the plantation area. The question is as to whether it would be an agricultural income. In the process we must note that the Department, placing reliance on the decision of the Calcutta High Court in CIT v. All India Tea and Trading Co. Ltd. [1978] 113 ITR 545 has held it as an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e title, which is the basis for consideration of payment of compensation. The amount so received is held to be a capital asset of the owner. The basis of the reasoning is that the owner made lost the use and control with regard to the property in question, which is the consideration for award of compensation. The court on the basis of the aforesaid of reasoning has reached the conclusion that the same would be a capital receipt and will not be a revenue receipt. Apart therefrom, even earlier, the question appeared directly before the Supreme Court in the case of Commr. of Agrl. I. T. v. Kailas Rubber and Co. Ltd. [1966] 60 ITR 435. When the assessee-company after the purchase of the rubber estate cut the rubber trees which had ceased to y ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
