9911796707
TMI Blog1990 (5) TMI 8X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iable to capital gains on the sale of the trees, whether the fair market value as on January 1, 1964, would not be less than the sale proceeds it fetched on the sale of the trees ?" The respondent-company is an assessee engaged in the rubber plantation industry. We are concerned with the assessment year 1979-80. During the relevant year, the assessee received an amount of Rs. 1,04,106 as rubber replanting subsidy from the Rubber Board. It was claimed as non-taxable. The Income-tax Officer rejected this plea and held that the rubber replanting subsidy is a revenue receipt assessable to Central income-tax. In appeal, the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) accepted the assessee's plea and held that rubber replanting subsidy did not constit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rected to be deleted. It is thereafter at the instance of the Revenue that the three questions of law on the above two different aspects have been referred for the decision of this court. We have heard counsel for the Revenue as also counsel for the respondent-assessee. The first question referred by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal as to whether the rubber replanting subsidy is assessable as the assessee's income is covered by a Full Bench decision of this court reported in CIT v. Ruby Rubber Works Ltd. [1989] 178 ITR 181 [FB]. The Full Bench has held that the rubber replantation subsidy received by plantation company is not revenue or income. In the light of the Full Bench decision of this court, we answer question No. 1 in the negativ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Ltd. [1991] 189 ITR 185) is inapplicable in this case. The question whether any capital gains arose when old unyielding rubber trees were sold came up for consideration in a batch of cases in I. T. R. Nos. 281 to 290 of 1985 (Kanthimathy Plantations P. Ltd. v. CIT [1990] 184 ITR 1 (Ker)) and I. T. R. Nos. 315 and 316 of 1985-CIT v. Midland Rubber and Produce Co. Ltd. [1991] 188 ITR 333 (Ker). In the first batch of cases, the old unyielding trees were sold during the relevant accounting periods relating to the assessment years 1975-76 to 1978-79. The plea of the assessee in those cases was that the value of the said assets (rubber trees) as on January 1, 1954, or January 1, 1964, would have been much more than the timber value obtained by t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
