https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=184163 Post-flue-curing operations on tobacco, including re-drying, stripping and grading, did not qualify as agricultural income because they were not shown to be processes ordinarily employed by cultivators generally or necessary to make the produce fit for market. The court found that tobacco was already marketable after flue-curing, and the later commercial processing was undertaken mainly to meet export requirements. Income attributable to those operations was therefore not exempt agricultural income and was assessable as business income. en-us Wed, 13 Nov 1963 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 30 Jun 2016 18:41:31 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=184163 Post-flue-curing operations on tobacco, including re-drying, stripping and grading, did not qualify as agricultural income because they were not shown to be processes ordinarily employed by cultivators generally or necessary to make the produce fit for market. The court found that tobacco was already marketable after flue-curing, and the later commercial processing was undertaken mainly to meet export requirements. Income attributable to those operations was therefore not exempt agricultural income and was assessable as business income. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 13 Nov 1963 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=184163