THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S GREEN GOLD TREE FARMS LTD.

PDF · subscribers
ITA/32/2000HC UttarakhandUKHC01025099200328 March 2006Author: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P. C. VERMA3 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the question framed by the appellants (Revenue) was not a substantial question of law. The Court stated that the factual question had been decided by the concurrent finding of fact by the lower authorities (CIT(A) and ITAT). Therefore, the appeal was dismissed. The Court did not provide a separate finding on the merits of whether the income was agricultural or not, but rather dismissed the appeal on the procedural ground that the question presented was not a substantial question of law. The operative direction was the dismissal of the appeal.

What were the facts?

The assessee, M/s Green Gold Tree Farms (P) Ltd., is a private limited company engaged in the cultivation of Poplar Trees. Their activities included land preparation, planting cuttings, irrigation, and spraying pesticides and fertilizers, referred to as Nursery Operations. The produce, poplar plants, were sold to farmers. The company also provided Extension Services for afforestation. For Assessment Year 1990-91, the assessee claimed income from Nursery Operations as agricultural income, exempt from tax. The Assessing Officer rejected this claim, estimating profits from Nursery Operations at Rs. 2/- per plant and extension charges at 25% of gross receipts, determining total income at Rs. 6,26,410/- (Rs. 4,64,232/- from Nursery Operations and Rs. 1,62,177/- from extension services). The Commissioner (Appeals) deleted the Rs. 4,64,232/- as agricultural income. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal, confirming the CIT(A)'s order. The Revenue appealed to the High Court.

What were the issues?

1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was legally justified in confirming the view of the learned CIT(A) who held that the sale proceeds of the plants raised in the nursery on the land constituted income from agriculture, thereby deleting Rs. 4,64,232/-? Assessee's Contention: The assessee contended that its nursery operations, involving the cultivation and sale of poplar plants, constituted agricultural income and was therefore exempt from tax. This was accepted by the CIT(A) and the ITAT. Revenue's Contention: The Revenue contended that the income from nursery operations was not agricultural income and should be taxed. They argued that the activities undertaken by the assessee went beyond basic agriculture and involved commercial nursery operations. The Assessing Officer had estimated the income from these operations.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARANCHAL AT NAINITAL

INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.476 OF 2001 (Old No. 32 of 2000)

1.

The Commissioner of Income Tax, Meerut 2. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax,

Circle, Dehradun ................ Appellants

Versus

M/s Green Gold Tree Farms (P) Ltd. Dehradun

............. Respondent Dated: March 28, 2006

Sri P. Maulekhi, learned standing counsel for the appellants

Coram: Hon'ble P.C. Verma, J. Hon'ble B.C. Kandpal, J.

This is an appeal against the judgment and order dated 11.10.1999 passed by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal 'A', New Delhi in ITAT No.4941/Del/93. The matter in dispute relates to Assessment Year 1990-91. The question framed in the Memo of Appeal is as under:-

"Whether on facts and in the circumstances of the case, ld. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was legally justified in confirming the view of the learned CIT(A) who held that the sale proceeds of the plants raised in the nursery on the land constituted the income from agriculture deleting Rs.4,64,232/- accordingly?

The assessee is a private limited company in cultivation of Poplar Trees. The activities being with the

preparation of land, tiling and manning. The cuttings are then planted and irrigated followed by spraying of pesticides and fertilizers. The produce in the form of poplar plants about one year old and are sold to farmers who wish to do poplar afforestation. This part of assessee's activity is called Nursery operations. Subsequent to the Nursery Operations, the appellant provides Extension Services to the farmers in carrying out the afforestation. The income from Nursery Operations was claimed as agricultural income exempt from tax. In the extension services, the appellant had returned loss. The Assessing Officer rejected the appellant's claim that income from Nursery Operations constituted agricultural income not liable to tax. The profits from Nursery Operations were estimated @Rs.2/- per plant for which extension charges were estimated @25% of gross receipts. Thus, total income was determined at Rs.6,26,410/- consisting of income of Rs.4,64,232/- from Nursery Operations and Rs.1,62,177/- from extension services. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals). The Commissioner (Appeals) vide his order deleted the income of Rs.4,64,232/- as this amount has been held to be agricultural income and accordingly partly allowed the appeal. Being aggrieved, the Department preferred an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The Tribunal after perusing the evidence on record dismissed the appeal of the Department and confirmed the judgment passed by Commissioner (Appeals). Feeling aggrieved, the Revenue has come up in the appeal.

We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned judgment as well as the question suggested by the appellants in the appeal. The aforesaid question framed in the appeal is not the substantial question of law for our determination and

hence the factual question stand decided by the concurrent finding of fact.

The appeal is dismissed accordingly. No order as to costs.

(B.C. Kandpal, J.) (P.C. Verma, J.) Rajeev Dang

The facts and circumstances of the case are identical to the facts in Income Tax Appeal No.239 of 2001, Commissioner of Income Tax and another Vs. M/s ONGC as agent of M/s Foramer France, Dehradun, which was decided on December 15, 2005. In the said appeal, the been answered in favour of the Revenue.

Accordingly, the appeal is allowed. The question is answered in favour of the Revenue.

(B.C. Kandpal, J.) (P.C. Verma, J.)

Rajeev Dang

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →