Composite tea income deductions allowed against agricultural portion where expenses were disallowed in central assessment.

Composite tea income is assessed under the Income-tax Act, 1961, with 40% treated as business income and 60% as agricultural income under the Assam Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1939. Under section 8(2) of the Assam Act and rule 5 of the Assam Rules, deductions may be allowed in computing net agricultural income to the extent they were not already allowed under the central assessment. The assessee was therefore entitled to claim genuine plantation, manufacture and sale expenses disallowed under the Income-tax Act against the 60% agricultural portion, and the Act did not justify restricting deductions to expenses narrowly attributable only to agricultural income.

---

---

Issues: Whether the assessee was entitled, under the Assam Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1939 and the Assam Agricultural Income-tax Rules, 1939, to deduct from the 60% agricultural portion of composite tea income the expenses disallowed in computing income under the Income-tax Act, 1961, and whether the Board was justified in treating that 60% portion as not agricultural income for this purpose.

Analysis: The statutory scheme treats income from tea grown and manufactured in India as composite income computed under the Income-tax Act, 1961, with 40% deemed business income and 60% treated as agricultural income under the Assam Act. Under section 8(2) of the Assam Act and rule 5 of the Assam Rules, deductions are to be allowed in computing the net agricultural income to the extent they have not already been allowed under the Income-tax Act. The court followed the earlier decision holding that the assessee is entitled to claim, before the State agricultural income-tax authorities, those genuine expenses relatable to plantation, manufacture and sale of tea which were disallowed under the central assessment, and that the Act does not warrant a contrary restriction limiting deduction only to expenses wholly and exclusively incurred for agricultural income in the narrow sense urged by the Revenue.

Conclusion: The questions were answered in the negative and in favour of the assessee; the assessee was entitled to the claimed deduction against the agricultural portion of the tea income.

---