Contractual removal of rubber trees: latex from slaughter-tapping is not agricultural income where no land interest or farming operation exists.

Latex obtained by slaughter-tapping rubber trees under an agreement for their removal was not agricultural income under the Tamil Nadu Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1955. The court held that the receipt had to be traced to the contract itself, not to land or agricultural operations, because the agreement conferred no interest in land, required no preservation or nourishment of the trees, and was directed to their annihilation and removal. The assessee was neither a cultivator nor a recipient of rent-in-kind, and the latex did not arise from any process ordinarily employed to make produce marketable. It was therefore not assessable as agricultural income.

---

---

Issues: Whether latex obtained by slaughter-tapping rubber trees under the agreement constituted agricultural income liable to tax under the Tamil Nadu Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1955.

Analysis: The character of the receipt had to be determined from the agreement and the statutory definition of agricultural income. The agreement did not confer any interest in land on the assessee, did not require preservation or nourishment of the trees for continued production, and was directed to the annihilation and removal of the trees. The income was traceable to the agreement itself rather than to land or agricultural operations. The assessee was neither a cultivator nor a receiver of rent-in-kind, and the receipt did not arise from any process ordinarily employed to render produce marketable or from sale of produce raised by agricultural operations. The earlier authorities relied on by the Revenue were distinguishable on their terms, since those cases involved obligations to maintain, manur, weed, spray, or otherwise carry on agricultural operations.

Conclusion: Latex derived from slaughter-tapping in the course of annihilating the trees was not agricultural income and could not be assessed under the Act.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the agreement shows that the source of the receipt is the contract for removal of trees and not land coupled with agricultural operations, the receipt does not fall within the definition of agricultural income.

---