https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=38696 The court ruled in favor of the revenue and against the assessee, affirming that the consideration received for rubber trees must be divided for tax assessment. The court determined that the amounts received for permitting cutting of trees and extracting latex must be bifurcated, with the portion related to latex considered agricultural income liable to tax. The court also emphasized the importance of harmonizing assessments and expenditure apportionment based on the Central income-tax authorities' approach, rejecting inconsistent methods by the agricultural income-tax department. The assessee was directed to bear the costs of references and advocates' fees, with the judgment to be forwarded to the Appellate Tribunal for further action. en-us Fri, 29 Jun 1973 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 08 Apr 2010 13:22:05 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=38696 The court ruled in favor of the revenue and against the assessee, affirming that the consideration received for rubber trees must be divided for tax assessment. The court determined that the amounts received for permitting cutting of trees and extracting latex must be bifurcated, with the portion related to latex considered agricultural income liable to tax. The court also emphasized the importance of harmonizing assessments and expenditure apportionment based on the Central income-tax authorities' approach, rejecting inconsistent methods by the agricultural income-tax department. The assessee was directed to bear the costs of references and advocates' fees, with the judgment to be forwarded to the Appellate Tribunal for further action. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 29 Jun 1973 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=38696