Agricultural income test for orchard receipts and partial car depreciation disallowance where supporting evidence is lacking.

Income from sale of fruit grown on leased orchard land is agricultural income only where it is derived from land used for agriculture and supported by basic agricultural operations on that land; merely obtaining the right to pluck fruits, without proof of agricultural land or such foundational operations, makes the receipt business income. The note also states that depreciation on a car may be partly disallowed where the claimed letting to a sister concern is not substantiated by agreement or accounts and personal use cannot be ruled out. On the stated facts, the first issue was treated as business income and the partial depreciation disallowance was maintained.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether income from sale of fruits from the orchard taken on lease was agricultural income or business income; (ii) Whether the disallowance of 50% of depreciation on the car was justified.

Issue (i): Whether income from sale of fruits from the orchard taken on lease was agricultural income or business income.

Analysis: Agricultural income under section 2(1A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 covers income derived from land used for agricultural purposes, and the judicial test requires basic agricultural operations on the land, with subsequent operations qualifying only when performed in conjunction with and in continuation of those basic operations. On the facts, the assessee had only the right to pluck fruits from the orchard, with no lease of agricultural land and no proof that the land was agricultural land or that basic operations had been carried out by the assessee. The activities of watering, pruning, cleaning and harvesting, without the foundational agricultural operations on the land itself, did not satisfy the statutory test.

Conclusion: The income from sale of fruits was rightly assessed as business income and not agricultural income.

Issue (ii): Whether the disallowance of 50% of depreciation on the car was justified.

Analysis: The assessee did not produce any agreement or supporting accounts to substantiate that the car was genuinely let out to the sister concern. The arrangement appeared nominal, the sister concern already had its own car, and the possibility of personal use by the assessee could not be ruled out. On these facts, the partial disallowance of depreciation was considered proper.

Conclusion: The disallowance of 50% of depreciation on the car was upheld.

Final Conclusion: The appeal failed on both substantive grounds, and the order of the first appellate authority was sustained in full.

Ratio Decidendi: Income from fruit produce is agricultural income only when it is derived from land used for agriculture through basic agricultural operations, with any subsequent operations being merely ancillary to those basic operations; where only the right to collect fruits is acquired without proof of such agricultural use, the receipt is business income.

---