Association of individuals for agricultural income requires legally recognised holding of property, not mere joint cultivation arrangements.

Joint cultivation by co-lessees and shared profit distribution can show an association of individuals for a common income-producing purpose, but taxability depends on whether the group holds the property in a legally recognised capacity. Here, the lands remained separately owned, and the pooling arrangement was limited to common cultivation under one manager with common accounts. Because the association did not own or hold the lands as owner, trustee, receiver, administrator, partner, company, or in any other recognised capacity, it was not a "person" within section 2(11) and could not be assessed as an association of individuals under the Agricultural Income-tax Act.

---

---

Issues: Whether two co-lessees who jointly arranged cultivation and managed their lands through one manager could be assessed as an association of individuals on the agricultural income from the entire cultivated area.

Analysis: Under section 3 of the Agricultural Income-tax Act, tax is charged on the total agricultural income of every person, and section 2(11) defines a person to include an individual or an association of individuals only if such association owns or holds property for itself or for another in a capacity recognised by law. The two assessees had combined their lands for common cultivation, appointed one manager, maintained common accounts, and shared profits in proportion to their respective holdings. This showed that they had associated for a common purpose and jointly carried on a profit-making venture. However, the lands remained separately owned by each assessee, so the association could not be said to own the property. The decisive question was whether the association held the lands in any capacity recognised by law. The facts showed only pooling of lands for joint cultivation and profit distribution, not holding in the character of owner, trustee, receiver, manager, administrator, executor, partnership, company, or any other legally recognised capacity.

Conclusion: The two assessees formed an association, but that association did not hold the lands in a capacity recognised by law and therefore was not a person within section 2(11); they could not be assessed as an association of individuals.

Ratio Decidendi: A combination of individuals is taxable as an association of individuals only if, in addition to acting in concert for a common income-producing purpose, it holds the relevant property in a legally recognised capacity.

---