1994 (2) TMI 18

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r section 5(e) or 5(k) of the Act. The grievance made in this case is that the Tribunal is not justified in confirming the finding of the Agricultural Income-tax Officer and also of the appellate authority as to equipment repairs and also the income from pepper, the remand on the interest allowable on the expenses incurred falling under section 5(e) or 5(k) of the Act, ought not to have been circumscribed by certain observations. As far as the finding of the Tribunal on the equipment repairs is concerned, the Agricultural Income-tax Officer allowed only 75 per cent. of the expenditure shown on equipment repairs. The assessee claimed that it had spent Rs. 28,203.02 on equipment repairs. However, the Agricultural Income-tax Officer rest....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ome from pepper, whereas the Agricultural Income-tax Officer on verification found that there were 700 matured peppervines in the estate of the assessee and he had estimated the yield at the rate of 1/2 kg. per peppervine. Accordingly, he has calculated the total yield as 350 kgs., and estimated the value of the yield at Rs. 10,500 at the rate of Rs. 30 per kg. We are of the view that the estimate so made by the Agricultural Income-tax Officer is very very modest, taking into consideration the normal yield of a matured peppervine and also the rate of pepper. However, the Tribunal has stated in its order that the income from pepper is Rs. 40,000. It appears to be a mistake, because, for this, the Tribunal does not give any additional reason.....