Court includes exempted agricultural income in tax calculation; notification under Section 17 applied.

The court held that agricultural income spent on maintaining public institutions, exempted under a government notification, should be included in the total agricultural income for tax calculation. The notification fell under Section 17 of the Rajasthan Agricultural Income-tax Act, which specified the treatment of partly exempted income. The court emphasized that the exemption did not fall under Section 5 for exclusion. Therefore, the tax authorities correctly assessed the unexempted income for tax purposes under Section 17, including the calculation of super-tax under Section 78. Each party was directed to bear their own costs.

---

---

Issues:
1. Interpretation of whether agricultural income spent on maintenance of medical, veterinary, and educational institutions should be included in total agricultural income for tax calculation.

Analysis:
The case involved a dispute regarding the inclusion of agricultural income spent on maintaining public institutions in the total agricultural income for tax calculation. The assessee sought clarification on whether the amount spent on medical, veterinary, and educational institutions, exempted under a government notification, should be considered for determining the rate of agricultural income tax. The notification exempted jagirdars from tax on the portion of income spent on public institutions. The court examined the relevant provisions of the Rajasthan Agricultural Income-tax Act, particularly Section 17, which addressed the tax treatment of exempted income. The court emphasized that the notification fell under Section 17, which specified the calculation of tax when income was partly exempted. It was concluded that the unexempted income should be assessed according to Section 17, and this provision also applied to the calculation of super-tax as per Section 78 of the Act.

The court considered the arguments presented by the assessee's counsel, citing relevant case laws, but found them irrelevant to the specific issue at hand. The court highlighted Section 80 of the Act, which empowered the State Government to make exemptions or modifications in agricultural income tax rates for specific classes of income utilized for agricultural development or charitable purposes. The court clarified that if the legislature intended to exclude the amount spent on public institutions from agricultural income, an exemption under Section 5 could have been granted. However, since the notification fell under Section 17, the tax authorities were correct in assessing the unexempted income for tax purposes.

In conclusion, the court answered the reference question by affirming that the agricultural income spent on maintaining public institutions, as exempted under the government notification, should be included in the total agricultural income for determining the agricultural income tax rate under Section 3 read with Section 17 of the Act. The parties were directed to bear their own costs in the case, considering the circumstances.

---