Agricultural income: excess payment on tenancy renewal characterised as agricultural income due to nexus with land ownership.

Whether an excess payment exacted by an owner on renewal of agricultural tenancy constitutes agricultural income was decided by applying the statutory definition of agricultural income and the principle that sums received by reason of ownership and the landlord tenant nexus fall within that character. The court treated customary renewal fees (Avakasam) as agricultural income and held that an additional sum, though irregular or reprehensible, was received by reason of ownership and the tenancy relationship and therefore formed part of agricultural income under Section 2(1)(a); the reference was answered for the assessee.

---

---

Issues: Whether the extra amount of Rs. 3,500 recovered by the landlord on renewal of tenancies is agricultural income within the meaning of Section 2(1)(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1922.

Analysis: The Court examined whether sums exacted by the owner of agricultural land as a condition precedent to granting renewal of tenancy fall within the statutory definition of agricultural income (rent or revenue derived from land used for agricultural purposes). The Court noted that accepted renewal fees (Avakasam and additional Avakasam) are agricultural income and considered whether an excess demanded before renewal, although possibly reprehensible or illegal, is received by the landlord by reason of his ownership of agricultural land and the landlord-tenant relationship. The Court relied on principle and precedent holding that payments made to a landlord by tenants by reason of that relationship, even if irregular, are agricultural in character when they arise out of the same nexus.

Conclusion: The extra amount of Rs. 3,500 recovered on renewal is agricultural income within the meaning of Section 2(1)(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1922, and the reference is answered in favour of the assessee.

---