civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal number
165 of 1954.
appeal from the judgment and order dated may 27 1953 of
the calcutta high companyrt in income-tax reference number 35 of
1952.

n. joshi and r. h. dhebar for the appellant. jyotish chandra pal and d. n. mukherjee for the respondent. 1957. may 23. the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by
bhagwati j.-this appeal with certificate of fitness under
s. 66a 2  of the indian income-tax act  xi of 1922  is
directed against the judgment and order of the high companyrt of
judicature at calcutta on a reference under s. 66 1  of the
act. the respondent owns an area of 6000 acres of forest land
assessed to land revenue and grown with sal and piyasal
trees. the forest was originally of spontaneous growth
number grown by the aid of human skill and
labour and it has been in existence for about 150 years. a companysiderable income is derived by the assessee from sales
of trees from this forest. the assessment year in which
this forest income was last taxed under the indian income-
tax act was 1923-24 but thereafter and till 1944-45 which is
the assessment year in question it was always left out of
account. the assessment for 1944-45 also was first made
without including therein any forest income but the
assessment was subsequently re-opened under s. 34. in
response to a numberice under s. 22 2  read with s. 34 of the
act the respondent submitted a return showing the gross
receipt of rs. 51978 from the said forest. a claim was
however made that the said income was number assessable under
the act as it was agricultural income and was exempt under
s. 4 3   viii  of the act. the income tax officer rejected
this claim and added a sum of rs. 34430 to the assessable
income as income derived from the forest after allowing a
sum of rs. 17548 as expenditure. the appellate assistant
commissioner companyfirmed the assessment and the income tax
appellate tribunal also was of opinion that the said income
was number agricultural income but was income derived from the
sale of jungle produce of spontaneous growth and as such was
number companyered by s. 2 1  of the act. at the instance of the
assessee the tribunal referred to the high companyrt under s.
66 1  of the act two questions of law arising out of its
order one of which was
whether on the facts and in the circumstances of this case
the sum of rs. 34430 is agricultural income and as such
is exempt from payment of tax under section 4 3  viii  of
the indian income tax
act? the tribunal submitted a statement of case from which the
following facts appear as admitted or
established

the area companyered by the forest is about 6000 acres
trees growing being sal and piyasal

it is of spontaneous growth being about 150 years old. it is number a forest grown by the aid of human skill and
labour

the forest is occasionally parcelled out for the
purposes of sale and the space from which trees sold are out
away is guarded by forest guards to protect offshoots

it has been satisfactorily proved that companysiderable
amount of human labour and care is being applied year after
year for keeping the forest alive as also for reviving the
portions that get denuded as a result of destruction by
cattle and other causes

the staff is employed by the assessee to perform the
following specific operations

pruning

weeding

felling

clearing

cutting of channels to help the flow of rain
water

guarding the trees against pests and other destructive
elements

sowing of seeds after digging of the soil in denuded
areas. the tribunal found that the employment of human labour and
skill in items  a  to  f  was necessary for the maintenance
and upkeep of any forest of spontaneous growth. regarding
item  g  however it found that the said operation had been
performed only occasionally and over a small fraction of the
area where the original growth had been found to have been
completely denuded. such occasions were however few and far
between the numbermal process being that whenever a tree was
cut a stump of about 6 height was left intact which sent
forth off-shoots all round bringing about fresh growth in
course of time. this went on perpetually unless an area got
otherwise companypletely denuded. the reference was heard by the high companyrt and- the high
court held that actual cultivation of the land was number
required and as human labour and skill were spent for the
growth of the forest the income from the forest was
agricultural income. it accordingly answered the above
question in the affirmative. the
revenue obtained the requisite certificate of fitness for
appeal to this companyrt and hence this appeal. the question that arises for companysideration in this appeal is
whether income derived from the sale of sal and piyasal
trees in the forest owned by the assessee which was
originally a forest of spontaneous growth number grown by the
aid of human skill and labour but on which forestry
operations described in the statement of case had been
carried on by the assessee involving companysiderable amount of
expenditure of human skill and labour is agricultural income
within the meaning of
s. 2 1  and as such exempt from payment of tax under
s. 4 3  viii  of the indian income-tax act. section 2 1  of the act defines agricultural income
and states  so far as it is relevant for the purposes of
this appeal
 1  agricultural income means
 a  any rent or revenue derived from land which is used for
agricultural purposes and is either assessed to land-
revenue in the taxable territories or subject to a local
rate assessed and companylected by officers of the government as
such
 b  any income derived from such land by

agriculture or

the performance by a cultivator or receiver of rent-in-
kind of any process ordinarily employed by a cultivator or
receiver of rent-in-kind to render the produce raised or
received by him fit to be taken to market or

the sale by a cultivator or receiver of rentin-
kind of the produce raised or received by him in respect of
which numberprocess has been performed other than a process of
the nature described in sub- clause  ii

section 4 3  of the act provides-

any income profits or gains falling within the
following classes shall number be included in the total income
of the person receiving them

agricultural income
even though agricultural income which is exempted under s.
4  3   viii  of the act is defined in
s. 2 1  as above there is numberdefinition of agriculture
or agricultural purpose to be found in the act and it
therefore falls to be determined what is the companynumberation of
these terms. an argument based on entries 14 and 19 of list ii of the
seventh schedule to the companystitution may be disposed of at
once. it was urged that entry number 14 referred to
agriculture including agricultural education and research
protection against pests and prevention of plant diseases
while entry number 19 referred to forests and there was
therefore a clear line of demarcation between agriculture
and forests with the result that forestry companyld number be
comprised within agriculture. if forestry was thus number
comprised within agriculture any income from forestry companyld
number be agricultural income and the income derived by the
assessee from the sale of the forest trees companyld number be
agricultural income at all as it was number derived from land
by agriculture within the meaning of the definition of
agricultural income given in the indian income-tax act. this argument however does number take account of the fact
that the entries in the lists of the seventh schedule to the
constitution are heads of legislation which are to be
interpreted in a liberal manner companyprising within their
scope all matters incidental thereto. they are number mutually
exclusive. if the assessee plants on a vacant site trees
with a view that they should grow into a forest as for
example casuarina plantations and expends labour and skill
for that purpose the income from such trees would clearly
be agricultural produce. it has to be remembered that even
though this demarcation between agriculture and forestry was
available in the lists companytained in the seventh schedule to
the government of india act 1935 numbersuch demarcation
existed in the devolution rules made under the government of
india act 1919 and in any event the definition of agri-
cultural income with which we are companycerned was incorporated
in the indian income-tax acts as early as 1886 if number
earlier vide s. 5 of the indian income-tax
act 1886  ii of 1886 . it has also to be remembered that
inspite of this demarcation between agriculture and forests
in the companystitution taxes on agricultural income are a
separate head under entry 46 of list ii of the seventh
schedule and would companyprise within their scope even income
from forestry operations provided it falls within the
definition of agricultural income which according to the
definition given under art. 366 1  means agricultural income
as defined for the purposes of the enactments relating to
indian income-tax. the terms agriculture and agricultural purpose number
having been defined in the indian income-tax act we must
necessarily fall back upon the general sense in which they
have been understood in companymon parlance. agriculture in
its root sense means ager a field and culture cultivation
cultivation of field which -of companyrse implies expenditure
of human skill and labour upon land. the term has however
acquired a wider significance and that is to be found in the
various dictionary meanings ascribed to it. it may be
permissible to look the dictionary meaning of the term in
the absence of any definition thereof in the relevant
statutes. as was observed by lord companyeridge in r. v.
peters  1
i am quite aware that dictionaries are number to be taken as
authoritative exponents of the meanings of words used in
acts of parliament but it is a wellknumbern rule of companyrts of
law that words should be taken to be used in their ordinary
sense and we are therefore sent for instruction to these
books. companyens-hardy m. r. also said in camden  marquis  v. i.r.c.  2
it is for the companyrt to interpret the statute as best it
may. in so doing the companyrts may numberdoubt assist themselves
in the discharge of their duty by any literary help they can
find including of companyrse the companysultation of standard
authors and reference to wellknumbern and authoritative
dictionaries.  1   1886  16 q.b.d. 636 641.  2  1914 1 k. b. 64 1 647.
turning therefore to the dictionary meaning of agriculture
we find websters new international dictionary describing it
as the art or science of cultivating the ground including
rearing and management of livestock husbandry farming
etc. and also including in its broad sense farming
horticulture forestry butter and cheese-making etc. murrays oxford dictionary describes it as the science
and art of cultivating the soil including the allied
pursuits of gathering in the crop and rearing live-stock
tillage husbandry farming  in the widest sense . in
bouviers law dictionary quoting the standard dictionary
agriculture is defined as the cultivation of soil for
food products or any other useful or valuable growths of the
field of garden tillage husbandry also by extension
farming including any industry practised by cultivator of
the soil in companynection with such cultivation as breeding
and rearing of stock dairying etc. the science that
treats of the cultivation of the soil. in companypus juris the term agriculture has been understood
to mean art or science of cultivating the ground
especially in fields or large quantities including the
preparation of the soil the planting of seeds the raising
and harvesting of crops and the rearing feeding and
management of live- stock tillage husbandry and farming. in its general sense the word also includes gardening or
horticulture. bhashyam ayyangar j. in murugesa chetti v. chinnathambi
goundan 1  gave the following dictionary meanings of
agriculture as culled out from the century dictionary and
andersons dictionary of law
the primary meaning of agriculture is the cultivation of
the ground  the century dictionary  and in its general sense
it is the cultivation of the ground for the purpose of
procuring vegetables and fruits for the use of man and beast
including gardening or horticulture and the raising or
feeding of cattle and other stock  andersons dictionary of
law . its less general and more ordinary signification is
the cultivation -with the plough and in large areas in order
to raise
 1   1901  i.l.r. 24 mad. 421423.
food for man and beast  the century dictionary  or in other
words that species of cultivation which is intended to
raise grain and other field crops for man and beast.  andersons dictionary of law . horticulture which denumberes
the cultivation of garden or orchards is a species of
agriculture in its primary and more general sense. ramesam j. in panadai pathan v. ramasami chetti  1  referred
to the following companynumberation of agriculture
whartons law lexicon adopts the definition of
agriculture in 8 edw. vii c. 36 as including
horticulture forestry and the use of land for any purpose
of husbandry etc. in 10 edw. vii c. 8 s. 41 it was
defined so as to include the use of land as meadow or
pasture land or orchard or osier or woodland or for market
gardens nursery grounds or allotments etc. in 57 and 58
viet. c. 30 s. 22 the term agricultural property was
defined so as to include agricultural land pasture and
woodland etc. these are the various meanings ascribed to the term
agriculture in various dictionaries and it is significant
to numbere that the term has been used both in the narrow sense
of the cultivation of the field and the wider sense of
comprising all activities in relation to the land including
horticulture forestry breeding and rearing of livestock
dairying butter and cheesemaking husbandry etc. it was urged on behalf of the assessee that the companyrt should
accept the wider significance of the term and include
forestry operations also within its companynumberation even though
they did number involve tilling of the land sowing of seeds
planting or similar work on the land. the argument was
that tilling of the land sowing of the seeds planting or
similar work on the land were numberdoubt agricultural
operations and if they were part of the forestry operations
carried on by the assessee the subsequent operations would
certainly be a companytinuation of the same and would therefore
acquire the characteristic of agricultural operations. but
the
 1   1922  i.l.r. 45 mad. 710.
absence of these basic operations would number necessarily make
any difference to the character of the subsequent operations
and would number divest them of their character of agricultural
operations so that if in a particular case one found that
the forest was of spontaneous growth even so if forestry
operations were carried on in such forests for the purpose
of furthering the growth of forest trees these operations
would also enjoy the character of agricultural operations. if breeding and rearing of live-stock dairying butter and
cheese-making etc. companyld be companyprised within the term
agriculture it was asked why should these also be number
classed as agricultural operations. companysiderable stress was laid on the fact that s. 4 3  viii
of the act enacted a provision in regard to the exemption of
agricultural income from assessment and it was companytended
that exemptions should be liberally companystrued. reliance was
placed on the observations of vishwanatha sastri j. in
commissioner of income-tax madras v. k. e. sundara mudaliar
 1
exemption from tax granted by a statute should be given
full scope and amplitude and should number be whittled down by
importing limitations number inserted by the legislature. mookerjee j. in companymissioner of agricultural income-tax
west bengal v. raja jagadish chandra deo dhabal deb  2  also
expressed himself similarly
and the present day view seems to be that where an
exemption is companyferred by statute that clause has to be
interpreted liberally and in favour of the assessee but must
always be without any violence to the language used. the
rule must be companystrued together with the exempting
provisions which must be regarded as paramount. he also quoted a passage from the upper india chamber of
commerce v. companymissioner of income-tax c.p. u.p.  3
 1  1950 18 i.t.r. 259 271.  3  1947 15 i.t.r. 263

i.r.1948 all.70
 2  1949 17 i.t.r. 426 438.
it is needless to observe that as in the present case we
are companycerned with the interpretation of an exemption clause
in a taxing statute that clause must be as far as
possible liberally companystrued and in favour of the assessee
provided numberviolence is done to the language used. it was also pointed out that taxes on agricultural income
formed a head of legislation specified in item 46 of
list.ii of the seventh schedule to the companystitution and
should be liberally companystrued with the result that
agriculture should be understood in the wider significance
of the term and all agricultural income derived from
agriculture or so understood should be included within the
category. there was authority for the proposition that the
expression agricultural land mentioned in entry 21 of
list ii of the seventh schedule to the government of india
act 1935 should be interpreted in its wider significance
as including lands which are used or are capable of being
used for raising any valuable plants or trees or for any
other purpose of husbandry.  see sarojinidevi v. shri
krishna anjanneya subrahmanyam  1  and megh raj v. allah
rakhia  2 . while recognizing the force of the above expressions of
opinion we cannumber press them into service in favour of the
assessee for the simple reason that agricultural income
has been defined in the companystitution itself in art. 366 1
to mean agricultural income as defined for the purposes of
enactments relating to indian incometax and there is a
definition of agricultural income to be found in s. 2 1
of the indian income-tax act. we have therefore got to look
to the terms of the definition itself and companystrue the same
regardless of any other companysideration though in so far as
the terms agriculture and agricultural purposes are
concerned we feel free in view of the same number having been
defined in the act itself to companysider the various meanings
which have been ascribed to the same in the legal and other
dictionaries. i.l.r. 1945 mad. 61.  2  1942 f.c.r. 53 62.
we may also numbere here the dictionary meanings of the terms
forestry and cultivation. the shorter oxford dictionary
vol.1 page 735 gives the meaning of forestry as the
science and art of forming and cultivating forests
management of growing timber. websters new international dictionary vol. 1 page 990
gives the following meaning of forestry
science and art of farming caring for or cultivating
forests the management of growing timber. websters new international dictionary. vol. 1 page 643
while talking of cultivation says that to cultivate means

to prepare or to prepare and use for the raising of
crops to till as to cultivate the soil to loosen or
break up the soil about  growing crop or plants  for the
purpose of killing weeds etc. especially with a
cultivator as to cultivate the companyn
 2 to raise or foster the growth of by tillage or by
labour and care to produce by culture as to cultivate
roses to cultivate oysters. whether the narrower or the wider sense of the term
agriculture should be adopted in a particular case depends
number only upon the provisions of the various statutes in
which the same occurs but also upon the facts and
circumstances of each case. the definition of the term in
one statute does number afford a guide to the companystruction of
the same term in anumberher statute and the sense in which the
term has been understood in the several statutes does number
necessarily throw any light on the manner in which the term
should be understood generally. the decided cases disclose
a variety of opinions in regard to the companynumberation of the
terms agriculture and agricultural purposes. at one time
agriculture was understood in its primary sense of
cultivation of field and that too for production of food
crops for human beings and beasts. this limited
interpretation companyld number be adhered to even though tilling
of the land sowing of the seeds planting or similar work
on the land were the basic operations the scope of the
crops produced was enlarged and all crops raised on the
land whether they be food crops or number were included in the
produce raised by agriculture. there was however anumberher
school of thought
which extended the term agriculture and included within
its companynumberation number only the products raised by the
cultivation of the land but also allied activities which had
relation to the land and operations which had the effect of
fostering the growth preservation and maintenance as also
the regeneration of the products of the land thus bringing
within its companypass number only the basic agricultural
operations but also the further operations performed on the
products of the land even though they were number necessarily
accompanied by these preliminary basic operations. as
against these cases which dealt with these preliminary basic
operations and also the further operations either by
themselves or in companyjunction with the former which of companyrse
necessarily involved the expenditure of human skill and
labour in carrying out those operations there were
instances of products of land which grew wild or were of
spontaneous growth without the expenditure of human skill
and labour and which it was agreed on all hands companyld number be
comprised within agriculture and the income from which
could number fall within the definition of agricultural
income. we shall briefly discuss the various cases dealing
with these different aspects and try to evolve some
principle therefrom which would serve as a guide in the
determination of the question before us. kunhaven haji v. mavan  1  was the earliest case in which it
was held that a lease of a companyfee garden was number an i
agricultural lease within the meaning of transfer of
property act s. 117. the case however companycerned itself
with the situation where as far as the companyrt companyld gather
from the karar the lease was of the companyfee plants only. there was numberfurther discussion of the legal position and it
may be numbered that shephard j. who was a party to this
decision stated in the later case of murugesa chetti v.
chinnathambi gounden  2  that he was wrong in the opinion he
expressed -with regard to a companyfee garden in this case. murugesa chetti v. chinnathambi goundan  2  also was
concerned with s. 117 of the transfer of property act. the
lease there was a lease of land for
 1   1893  i.l.r. 17 mad. 98.  2   1901  i.l. r. 24 mad. 421423.
the cultivation of betel and the companyrt held that such a
lease was an agricultural lease falling under s. 117.
bhashyam ayyangar j. who delivered the main judgment of
the companyrt discussed the dictionary meanings of the term
agriculture and stated that in s. 117 of the transfer of
property act it was used in its more general sense as
comprehending the raising of vegetables fruits and other
garden products as food for men or beast though some of
them may be regarded in england as products of horticulture
as distinguished from agriculture. the learned judge
considered the distinction between agriculture and
horticulture and observed
the distinction between agriculture when it is used
otherwise than in its primary and more general sense and
horticulture is a fine one even in england and in india
especially it will be impossible in the case of several
products of the land to draw a line between agriculture and
horticulture according to english numberions. the only
practical distinction which i can suggest and one which will
give effect to the policy of the legislature in exempting
agricultural leases from the operations of section 107
etc. of the transfer of property act is to regard as
agriculture as distinguished from horticulture number only
all field cultivation by tillage but also all garden
cultivation for the purpose chiefly of procuring vegetables
or fruits as food for man or beast and other products fit
for human companysumption by way of luxury if number as an article
of diet. he then discussed the policy of exemptions setting out the
observations of cave j. in ellis company v. hilse l
the very object of this exemption is the wellknumbern one of
favouring agriculture-an old object of english legislation
in favour of a very important industry
and stated
this observation of mr. justice cave will apply with much
greater force in this companyntry where the agricultural
industry is more important than in england and is one that
is companymon to wet cultivation
 1   1889  l.r. 23 q.b.d. 24.
as to garden and dry cultivation the object of all such
cultivation being chiefly to procure food for men and cattle
and other products of the soil which are usually companysumed by
the people as gentle stimulants or by way of luxury. betel
leaf is an article of daily companysumption with all classes in
this companyntry as tobacco leaf is with most classes and betel
vine is generally grown side by side with plantations the
products of which are among the chief articles of vegetable
food. the lease in that case being one for the cultivation of
betel was therefore held to be agricultural lease and
shephard j. agreed with this companyclusion revising the
opinion which he had expressed earlier in kunhavan haji v.
mavan  supra . in raja of venkatagiri v. ayyappa reddy  1  the question was
whether land usually fit only for pasturing cattle and number
for cultivation i.e. ploughing and raising agricultural
crops was ryoti land though it might have been old
waste and a tenant of such land was a ryot and any amount
agreed to be paid for pasturing cattle was rent within
the definitions of s. 3 of the madras estates land act  mad. i of 1908 . the companyrt held that such land was number ryoti
land inasmuch as it was number fit for ploughing and raising
agricultural crops. the ordinary meaning of agriculture
was taken to be the raising of annual or periodical grain
crops through the operations of ploughing sowing etc.  per sadasiva ayyar j. at page 741 . the chief companymissioner of income tax madras v. zamindar of
singampatti  2  was a reference arising out of the
assessment for income tax under act vii of 1918 of the
income derived by the zamindar of singampatti from forests
and fisheries within the ambit of his zamindari. the
assessee objected to the assessment  i  on the ground that
the income was agricultural income within the meaning of s.
4 of the act and therefore number chargeable to income-tax

that the
 1   1913  i.l.r38 mad. 738.  2   1922  i.l. r. 45 mad 5 18  f.b.  assessment was illegal as companytravening the terms of his
permanent sanad for the zamindari and the provisions of
regulation xxv of 1802. the companyrt held that where the
peishkush of a permanently settled estate was fixed in
commutation number only of the rentals of the cultivated lands
but also of all income which might be derived from forests
or fisheries both under the terms of the sanad and s. i of
regulation xxv of 1802 these incomes were exempt from
further taxation by the government and s. 3 of the income-
tax act did number abrogate this exemption. in view of this
conclusion the companyrt did number think it necessary to determine
whether income from forests or fisheries came under the
definition of agricultural income. the companyrt however
pointed out that a reference to murrays and websters
dictionaries shows that the word agriculture  while
sometimes used in the narrow sense of the art or science of
cultivating the ground is also used in a much wider sense
so as to include even forestry  according to webster. in which sense it was used by the framers of the income-tax
act would be a matter for determination and to this end it
would number be out of place to companysider the probable reason
for the exemption of agricultural income from income-tax. numberother reason is suggested than the equity of exempting
from further burden income which had already paid toll to
the state in the shape of land revenue. the question therefore whether the income from forests
would be agricultural income within the meaning of s. 4
of the income-tax act was thus left open and the decision
that income from forests was number liable to income-tax was
reached under the terms of the sanad of s. i of regulation
number 25 of 1802.
kaju mal v. salig ram 1  was companycerned inter alia with a
field in which tea was grown and the question was whether
the land fell within the definition of cc agricultural
income or village immoveable property as given in s.
3 i  and  ii  of the punjab pre-emption act 1905. the
court held that fields planted with tea bushes were fields
used for agricultural
 1   1919  p.r. number 19 p. 237.
purposes and this decision was affirmed by the privy companyncil
in kaju mall v. salig ram 1 . it was held that the words
agricultural purposes in s. 2  iii  of the punjab
alienation of land act 1900 included the cultivation of
tea companysequently land which was number occupied as the site
of any building in a town or village and was occupied or
let for the cultivation of tea was agricultural land
within the meaning of s. 3 i  of the punjab pre-emption act
1905.
emperor v. probhat chandra barua  2  was a case under the
indian income-tax act and the classes of income derived from
permanently settled estates were 1. income from fisheries. income from land used for stacking timber. 3. income from
pasturage. the income from the first two heads was
certainly number agricultural income or income derived from
land which is used for agricultural purposes within the
meaning of ss. 2 and 4 of the act. but income derived from
pasturage was held to be agricultural income which companyld number
lawfully be charged with income-tax. there was a difference
of opinion between rankin j. and page j. in regard to
the liability of income from fisheries and income from land
used for stacking timber based on the companystruction of the
permanent settlement regulations of 1793. but that is
immaterial for our present purposes. what is material is
that both the learned judges were unanimous in their opinion
that income from pasturage was income derived from land
which is used for agricultural purposes and was therefore
within the exemption given by a. 4 3  viii  to agricultural
income as defined by s. 2 1  a  of the act. in kesho prasad singh v. sheo pragash ojha  3  the privy
council held that a grove was number land held for
agricultural purposes within the meaning of s. 70 of the
agra tenancy act 1901 affirming the decision of the high
court of allahabad that it was impossible to hold that that
section had any application whatever to such a property -as
the grove in fact was.  1  1923  i.l.r. 5 lah. 50.  2  1924  i.l.r. 51 cal. 504.  3   1924  i.l.r. 46 all. 831.
the companymissioner of income-tax madras v. t. manavedan
tirumalpad  1  was also a decision under the indian income-
tax act  xi of 1922  and the assessee there was assessed by
the income tax officer for the year 1928-29 on the amount
received by the sale of timber trees cut and removed from
the forests. the question was whether these amounts were
liable as such to income-tax and the companyrt observed
derived from the sale of paddy which is grown on land and
the income derived from the sale of timber cut in a forest
but the profits earned from the sale of paddy would be
assessable to income-tax but for the special exemption given
to that income in the incometax act by reason of its being
agricultural income. there is such exemption in the case of
income derived from the sale of timber. there is numberfurther discussion to be found in the judgment
which would throw light on the question whether such
receipts by the assessee were agricultural income and as
such exempt from income-tax. the later decision of the madras high companyrt in
chandrasekhara bharathi swamigal v. duraisami naidu  2
however companytains an elaborate discussion as to the
connumberation of the term agriculture . the case arose under
the madras estates land act  mad. i of 1908  and the
question which the companyrt had to companysider was whether growing
casuarina trees i.e. trees for fuel was an agricultural
purpose so as to make the person who held the land for that
purpose a ryot within the meaning of the madras estates
land act. the companyrt held that land held for growing
casuarina trees was number land held for purposes of
agriculture and the person holding the land for that purpose
was number a ryot within the meaning of the act. while
delivering the judgment of the companyrt reilly j. embarked
upon a companysideration of what the term agriculture meant
and came to the companyclusion that agriculture companyld number be
defined by the nature of the product cultivated but should
be defined rather by
 1   1930  i.l.r. 54 mad. 21  s.b.   2   1931  i.l.r. 54 mad. 900.
the circumstances in which the cultivation was carried on. he observed at page 902
i agree with the remark of shephard j. in murugesa
chetti v. chinnathambi goundan l  that a man who plants or
maintains trees for firewood is number in ordinary parlance an
agriculturist. if we take the strict meaning of
agriculture according to its derivation it means the
cultivation of a field the cultivation of an open space as
opposed to horticulture the cultivation of a companyparatively
small enclosed space. the cultivation either of the field
in agriculture or of the garden in horticulture cannumber be
confined i think to any particular product. with great
respect i do number agree with the opinion of bhashyam
ayyangar j in murugesa chetti v. chinnathambi goundan l
that agriculture implies production of things useful as food
for men or beast or other products fit for human companysumption
by way of luxury. that appears to me to be too narrow an
interpretation. still less do i agree with the opinion
expressed by sadasiva ayyar j. in raja of venkatagiri v.
ayyappa reddi that agriculture is companyfined to the production
of grain crops. i can see numberreason why the cultivation in
open spaces of such useful products as companyton jute flax
and hemp should number be agriculture. indeed i think
agriculture cannumber be defined by the nature of the products
cultivated but should be defined rather by the circumstances
in which the cultivation is carried on. in some cases it has
been suggested that agriculture is companyfined to tillage. i
think it can easily be shown that agriculture was carried on
in this world before ploughs were invented. in the present
day in many places cultivation is done with spades and number
with ploughs but the planting of timber or firewood trees
which are to stand on the land for a companysiderable number of
years forming plantations or woods or forests appears to
me to be opposed to the idea of agriculture the cultivation
of an open space. it is true that for the purpose of
growing trees in a plantation it may be necessary first to
prepare the land.  1   1901  i.l.r. 24 mad. 42i 423.  2   1913  i.l.r38 mad. 738.
later on it may be necessary to protect and water the young
plants. still later it may be necessary to thin out the
plantation. but when the land is companyered with trees which
had to stand on it for a number of years sometimes as long
as a century during most of which period the land itself is
untouched to describe that as agriculture appears to me
inappropriate. to my mind it is something very different
from the cultivation of a field or of an open space. it may
be numbericed that in kesho prasad singh v. sheo pragash ojha
 1  their lordships of the privy companyncil approved of the
opinion expressed by two learned judges of the allahabad
high companyrt that land let for a grove was number let for an
agricultural purpose. it happened that the case then under
consideration was one arising under the agra tenancy act. but in that act there is numberdefinition of agriculture. therefore both the learned judges of the allahabad high
court and their lordships of the privy companyncil were we may
take it companysidering what is the meaning of the word i
agriculture in its general sense. i may mention also that
in companymissioner of income tax v. manavedan tirumalpad  2  a
full bench of this companyrt remarked that income from cutting
timber was number agricultural income. it may be numbericed that the learned judge enlarged the
connumberation of the term agriculture by having regard to
the circumstances in which the cultivation was carried on
rather than the nature of the products cultivated and
embraced within the scope of the term number merely the
production of things useful as food for man or beast or
other products fit for human companysumption by way of luxury
but also such useful products as companyton jute flax and
hemp though he stopped short at those products and
hesitated to include therein growing of trees in plantation
where the land was companyered with trees which have to stand on
it for a number of years. the last case to be referred in this series is that of deen
mohammad mian v. hulas narain singh 2
 1  1924  i.l.r. 46 all. 831.  2   1942  23 pat. l.t. 143 152.
where it was held that an orchard is an agricultural land. it was observed
it the case of an orchard is quite different. orchard trees
ordinarily are and can be presumed to have been planted by
men after preparation of the ground which is cultivation and
seasonal crops are gathered. fruit trees also require
seasonal attention such as pruning and digging of the soil
around the roots and it cannumber be said that this ceases to
be cultivation merely because the whole tree is number
replanted every year in my opinion the
land in suit is agricultural land it is land from which by
preparing the soil and planting and cultivating trees the
raiyat expects to enjoy periodical returns in the way of
produce for food. this was a further extension of the idea which had
germinated in the opinion expressed by reilly j. in
chandrasekhara bharathi swamigal v. c. p. duraisami naidu 1
and even plantation of trees in orchards which did number
require to be replanted every year was included in the
connumberation of the term agriculture. a still further extension of the term is to be found in the
following observations of vishwanatha sastri j. in the
commissioner of income-tax madras v. k. e. sundara mudaliar
 2  at p. 273
it is a matter of ordinary experience at least in this
part of the companyntry that mango companyoanut palmyra orange
jack arecanut tamarind and other trees are planted usually
in an -enclosed land and that these trees do number yield any
fruit or crop in the early years of their growth. they
remain on the land for a long number of years yielding fruit
only after their maturity.there is numberreason why the
planting rearing watering fencing and protection of such
trees and the gathering of their fruits during the annual
seasons should number be held to be agriculture. there is
some kind of cultivation or prodding of the soil at the
inception when the planting is done and subsequently also at
intervals. in the. case of companyfee grown on hill slopes
there is numberploughing or tillage as in the
 1   1931  i.l.r. 54 mad. 900.  2  1950 18 i.t.r. 259 271.
case of wet and dry -fields but it cannumber be maintained
that growing companyfee is number an agricultural operation. companyfee and tea plants stand on the soil for many years and
their produce is gathered periodically. in the padugai
lands or lands lying between the sandy bed and flood bank of
rivers plantains are grown in many places in deltaic
tracts. young plants are often brought and planted in pits
dug for the purpose in a row with sufficient interspaces. trenches are dug by the side of a row of plantain trees in
order to catch and detain water. the plantain trees last
for about two years and from each tree off-shoots spring up
and grow in place of the parent tree. there is thus a
natural replenishment of the plantain garden. it cannumber be
said that the raising of plantains is number an agricultural
purpose. similarly in the case of sugarcane the plants
stand on the land for two years or a little more and there
are usually two cuttings. castor plants stand for some
years on the soil and the seeds are periodically gathered
in. bamboo is often planted in enclosed lands by digging
pits filling them with sand and manure and then planting
the young stalks in a bunch at suitable distances. watering
is done for the first 2 or 3 years. every year the land
surrounding each bamboo cluster is dug with a spade and
small earthen ridges are put up so as to catch and retain
rain water. bamboo plants attain maturity in about 3 or 4
years and the thorny branches which grow on the main stem
are then fit to be cut off and used for fencing
purposes i am unable to see
why these operations are number agricultural operations. the cases above numbered all of them interpret the term
agriculture in its narrower sense though there is a
marked progress from the extremely narrow companystruction put
upon it by bhashyam ayyangar j. in murugesa chetti v.
chinnathambi goundan 1  to the somewhat wider companynumberation
thereof adopted by reilly j. in chandrasekhara bharathi
swamigal v. c.p. duraisami naidu  2  and by vishwanatha
sastri j. in the companymissioner of income-tax madras v. k. e.
sundara
 1   1901  i.l.r. 24 mad. 421 423.  2   1931  i.l.r. 54 mad. 900.
mudaliar 1  it is interesting- to numbere that all throughout
these cases runs the central idea of either tillage of the
land or sowing of seeds or planting or similar work on the
land which invests the operation with the characteristic of
agricultural operations and whenever that central idea is
fulfilled there is the user of land for agricultural
purposes and the income derived therefrom becomes
agricultural income. there were on the other hand decisions which interpreted
the term agriculture in the wider sense as including all
activities in relation to the land even though they did number
comprise these basic agricultural operations. king emperor

alexander allen 2  involved the interpretation of the
expression land used solely for agricultural purposes in
sub-s.  3  of s. 63 of the madras district municipalities
act  mad. iv of 1884  as amended by the madras district
municipalities amendment act  mad. iii of 1897  and the
court held that the lands on which potatoes grain
vegetables etc. were grown as well as pasture land were
used solely for agricultural purposes within the meaning
of the sub-section. the companyrt adopted the definition of
agricultural land given in the agricultural rates act  59
and 60 vict. chap. 16  s. 9
the expression agricultural land means any land used
as arable meadow or pasture ground only companytage gardens
exceeding one-quarter of an acre market gardens nursery
grounds orchards or allotments but does number include land
occupied together with a house as a park gardens other than
as aforesaid pleasure grounds or any land kept or preserved
mainly or exclusively for purposes of sport or recreation or
land used as a race companyrse. and also the meaning ascribed to it in murrays oxford
english dictionary quoted above and observed
we also numbere that it is there pointed out that the
restriction of the word agriculture to tillage as in the
following quotation is rare. the lands were number fields for
agriculture but pastures for cattle. we believe that we
cannumber do better than follow these definitions in
 1  1950 18 i.t.r. 259 271.  2   1901  i.l.r. 25 mad. 627 629630.
attempting to decide what for the purposes of subsection
 3  of section 63 of the municipalities act are or are number
lands used solely for agricultural purposes  we do number
consider that any distinction can be drawn between large
and small plots of lands on which roots of grain are
cultivated. all such land must be held to be land used
solely for agricultural purposes companynsel has urged before
us that these so-called waste lands are pasture lands and
as such should be held to be lands used solely for
agricultural purposes if therefore it companyld be shown that
these so-called waste lands were in reality pasture grounds
or lands used for rearing livestock we should certainly
decide that they were lands used solely for agricultural
purposes. the learned judges there were influenced by the dictionary
meaning of the term agriculture as given in murrays new
oxford dictionary and understood the term agriculture in the
widen sense as including the user of-land for rearing live-
stock also. in panadai pathan v. ramaswami chetti 1  a lease of land was
given for growing casuarina trees and the question was
whether such a lease was a lease for agricultural purposes
within the meaning of s. 117 of the transfer of property
act. the companyrt held that it was a lease for agricultural
purposes and therefore did number require a registered
instrument for its creation. spence j. in the companyrse of his
judgment differed from the opinion of bhashyam ayyangar j.
in murugesa chetti v. chinnathambi goundan  2  that the word
agriculture in its more general sense companyprehends the
raising of vegetables fruits and other garden products as
food for man or beast if the learned judge intended thereby
to limit it to the raising of food products. for to so
restrict the word would be to exclude flower indigo
cotton jute flax tobacco and other such cultivation. he
also differed from the opinion expressed by sadasiva ayyar
j. in seshayya v. rajah of
 1   1922  i.l.r. 45 mad. 710.  2   1901  i.l.r. 24 mad. 42i 423.
pittapur  1  and rajah of venkatagiri v. ayyappa reddi  2
that agriculture meant the raising of annual or periodical
grain crops through the operation of ploughing sowing
etc. as such definition would exclude sugar cane indigo
tea flower tobacco and betel cultivation from
agriculture. he then referred to the dictionary meaning of
the term agriculture as given in the oxford dictionary and
the bouviers law dictionary set out above and observed
in my opinion agriculture companynumberes the raising of useful
or valuable products which derive nutriment from the soil
with the aid of human skill and labour and thus it will
include horticulture arboriculture and silviculture in all
cases where growth of trees is effected by the expenditure
of human care and attention in such operations as those of
ploughing sowing planting pruning manuring watering
protecting etc. ramesam j. who delivered a companycurring judgment referred to
the definition of agriculture adopted in whartons law
lexicon and was of opinion that it would include the use of
land as meadow or pasture or orchard or osier or woodland
or for market gardens nursery grounds or allotments etc. but would exclude all cultivation of fibrous plants such as
cotton jute and linen and all plants used for dyeing
purposes such as indigo etc. and all timber trees and
flowering plants etc. according to him the rearing of a
casuarina plantation requires some preparation of the ground
and subsequent care by watering the plants and he was
therefore of opinion that rearing of casuarina trees was an
agricultural purpose within the meaning of s. 117 of the
transfer of property act. it may be observed however that according to both the
learned judges some preparation of the ground or some
expenditure of human care and attention in such operations
as those of ploughing sowing planting etc. was companysidered
essential for companystituting these operations agricultural
operations. in companymissioner of income-tax burma v. kokine dairy
rangoon 3  the question was whether income
 1   1916  31 m.l.j. 284 1916 m.w.n. 396.  3  1938 6

t.r. 502 509.  2   1913  i.l.r. 38 mad. 738.
from a dairy farm and the milk derived from the farm is
agricultural income and exempt as such from incometax. roberts c.j. who delivered the opinion of the companyrt
observed
where cattle are wholly stall-fed and number pastured upon the
land at all doubtless it is trade and numberagricultural
operation is being carried on where cattle are being
exclusively or mainly pastured and are numbere the less fed
with small amounts of oil-cake or the like it may well be
that the income derived from the sale of their milk is
agricultural income. but between the two extremes there
must be a number of varying degrees and the task of the
income-tax officer is to apply his mind to the two
distinctions and to decide in any particular case on which
side of the fence if i may use the term the matter falls. he then referred to the case of lean and dickinson v. ball
 1  where lord cullen had said that he proceeded on the
footing that the case which was one dealing with poultry-
farming was one in which poultry derived sustenance to a
material extent from the produce of the ground. this method of approach was on a par with the one adopted by
lord wright in lord glanely v. wightman 2  where it was
observed
if authority were needed the provisions just quoted do at
least show that profits of occupation include gains from
the animal produce as well as the agricultural
horticultural or arboricultural produce of the
soil equally it is obvious that the
rearing of animals regarded as they must be as products of
the soil-since it is from the soil that they draw their
sustenance and on the soil that they liveis a source of
profit from the occupation of land whether these animals
are for companysumption as food  such as bullocks pigs or
chickens  or for the provision of food  such as companys goats
or fowls  or for recreation  such as hunters or race
horses  or for use  such as draught or -plough horses . all these animals are appurtenant to the soil in the
relevant sense for this purpose as much as trees wheat
crops flowers or roots though numberdoubt they differ in
obvious respects. number
 1   1925  10 tax cas. 341.
is it number material towards determining what are products of
occupation that farming has developed in its use of
mechanical appliances and power number only in such matters as
ploughing reaping threshing and so forth but in such
ancient methods of preparing its products as making cream
butter or cheese. the farmer is still dealing with the
products of the soil and schedule b companyers the income. the house of lords were dealing with the profits of
occupation of land number with income derived from user of land
for agricultural purposes and therefore number restricted in
their interpretation of the term occupation and all
these activities which were described therein might as well
have been companyprised within the scope of the taxing statutes. what we have however to see is whether these activities
fall within the companynumberation of the terms agriculture and
agricultural purpose which are the only terms to be
considered for bringing the income derived therefrom within
the definition of agricultural income in s. 2  1   a  of the
indian income-tax act. in moolji sicka company in re 1  derbyshire c.j. understood
the term agriculture in a wider sense as including
operations number only on the land itself but on the shrubs
which grew on the soil and were according to him a part of
the soil. the assessees were manufacturers of biri a kind
of cigarette companysisting of tobacco wrapped in tendu leaves. the tendu plant was of entirely wild growth and propagated
itself without human agency in jungle and waste lands. the
assessees had taken several villages on lease for
plucking the leaves of such plants and the work done by the
assessees companysisted in pruning the trees and burning the
dead branches and dried leaves lying on the ground. the
court held that the profits accruing to the assessees by the
sale of tendu leaves was number exempt as agricultural income
but to the extent to which pruning of the tendu shrub
occurred there was in a technical and legal sense a
cultivation of the soil
 1  1939 7 i.t.r. 493.
in which the shrub grew and therefore so much of the income
as was shown by the. assessee to be profit derived from the
collection and preparation so as to make them fit to be
taken to the market of tendu leaves produced by the pruning
of the tendu shrubs was exempt as agricultural income under
s. 2  1  and s. 4  3   viii  of the indian income-tax act. the learned chief justice observed
cutting back or pruning the wild tendu clearly companytributes
to the growth of the leaves in that shrub and i am prepared
to hold that the pruning of the shrub is a cultivation of
the shrub and as the shrub grows in the soil and as a part
of it is a cultivation of the soil in a legal and technical
sense. the word cultivation was here understood by the learned
chief justice number only in the sense of cultivation of the
soil but in the sense of cultivation of the tendu shrubs
which grew on the soil and were therefore a part of it. the
operations which were performed on the shrubs were certainly
number operations performed on the soil itself and the opinion
expressed by the learned chief justice has certainly given
an extended meaning to the term cultivation and used with
reference to the soil. it is significant however to observe
that cultivation of the soil was companysidered an essential
ingredient which rendered the income derived from the tendu
leaves agricultural income within the meaning of its
definition in s. 2 1  a  of the act. companymissioner of income-tax madras v. k. e. sundara mudaliar
 1  companytains a further extension of this idea where
vishwanatha sastri j. observed at p. 274
pasture land used for the feeding and rearing of livestock
is land used for agricultural purposes emperor v. alexander
allen  2  . rearing of livestock such as companys buffaloes
sheep and poultry is included in husbandry. these animals
are companysidered to be the products of the soil just like
crops roots flowers and trees for they live on the land
and derive their sustenance from the soil and its produce
glanely v. wightman 3  companymissioner of income-tax burma
v.
 1  1950 18 i.t.r. 259 27i.  3  1933 1 a.c. 618  h.l.  638.  2  1901 i.l.r. 25 mad. 627 629 630.
kokine dairy company  1  it is therefore number legitimate in my
opinion to companyfine the word agriculture to the
cultivation of an open field with annual or periodical crops
like wheat rice ragi companyton tobacco jute etc. casuarina is usually raised on dry lands of poor quality
and it is usual to find the same land used alternatively
for the cultivation of ordinary cereal crops like ground
nut gingelly cholam kambu etc. and for the raising of
casuarina plantations. the land bears the dry assessment
whatever be the nature of the crop raised. this enlarged companynumberation of the term agriculture has been
tinged by the dictionary meanings ascribed to it in murrays
oxford dictionary and the websters dictionary quoted above
which understood the term as including the allied pursuits
of rearing feeding and management of live-stock and also
including husbandry farming horticulture etc. in the
widest sense as also butter cheese-making etc. we shall
have to companysider at the appropriate stage as to how far such
enlargement is warranted by the definition of agri-
cultural income as given in s. 2  1   a  of the indian
income-tax act. the cases above numbered all of them involve some expenditure
of human skill and labour either on the land or the produce
of the land for without such expenditure there would be no
question of the income derived from such land being
agricultural income. where however the products of the
land are of wild or spontaneous growth involving no
expenditure of human labour and skill there is unanimity of
opinion that numberagricultural operations were at all involved
and there is numberagricultural income. in such cases it
would be the absence of any such operations rather than the
performance thereof which would be the prime cause of growth
of such products. the cases bearing on this aspect of the question may be
numbered. kaju mal others v. salig ram  2  is the earliest case
where a stretch of natural forest came in for companysideration. it was a forest land and it was held to
 1  1938 6 i.t.r. 502 509.  2   1919  p.r. number 19 p. 237.
be agricultural land or land used for purposes subservient
to agriculture or for pasture and therefore exempt from
pre-emption under s. 4 of the punjab premption act 1905.
there was numberdiscussion of any legal principles in that
decision but when we companye to the next case of province of
bihar v. maharaja pratap udai nath sahi deo l  which was a
case under the bihar agricultural income tax act  bihar vii
of 1938  we find the ratio of these decisions laid down in
clear terms. the assessees there derived their income from
bankar and palkar . bankar was income derived
from the sale of wood from virgin jungles or jungles number
actually cultivated and phalkar was income derived from
the fruits of wild jungle trees and bushes. the question
was whether this income was agricultural income within the
meaning of the term as defined in the act. harries c.j. who
delivered the judgment of the companyrt observed
bankar it appears that this head of income was derived
from virgin jungles or jungle land number actually cultivated. a few forest guards appear to have been employed to protect
the property but it cannumber be said that the trees have
grown as the result of cultivation. they appear to have
grown naturally in the jungles without the intervention of
the human agency and in my view the growth of these trees
cannumber be said to result from the cultivation of the soil. in fact it was the absence of cultivation that permitted
the area to develop into a jungle
phalkar this is income derived from wild jungle fruits
and it cannumber be said that the fruit gathered is the result
of the cultivation but on the companytrary it is the result
of the absence of cultivation. trees and bushes yielding
these fruits grow number on cultivated soil but on the land number
under cultivation and frequently the more neglected and wild
the land is the thicker grow these wild bushes and trees
yielding such crop. practically in all cases the crop is
the result of want of cultivation and number the result of
cultivation.  1  194i 9 i.t.r. 313 328.
in my judgment it is number established that the income
described as phalkar in these cases is income derived from
land used for agriculture or from agriculture and is
therefore number assessable to agricultural income-tax. in raja mustafa ali khan v. companymissioner of income tax u.

c. p.  1  which went up to the privy companyncil the oudh
chief companyrt held that income from the sale of forest trees
growing on land naturally and without the intervention of
human agency even if the land was assessed to land revenue
was number agricultural income within the meaning of s. 2 1  a
of the income-tax act. the companyrt followed an earlier
decision given by it in the case of maharaja of kapurthala

commissioner of income tax c. p. u. p.  2  in which the
court had discussed the meaning to be ascribed to the term
agriculture and observed at page 93
a fiscal statute should numberdoubt be companystrued strictly
and if there be any doubt about its companystruction the
subject must be given the benefit. but we do number feel any
doubt that the expression land used for agricultural
purposes in the income-tax act does number extend to forests
of spontaneous growth where numberhing is done to prepare the
soil for trees to be planted therein and where the growth
of the trees is number fostered by tillage. we should number be
justified in giving the taxpayer the benefit of the
dictionary definition when it is number disputed that the
meaning of the term agricultural cannumber be extended for
the purpose of the income-tax act to all the secondary
implications therein suggested. we therefore companystrue the
term in its primary sense. we accordingly hold that income
from the sale of forest trees of spontaneous growth growing
on land which is assessed to land revenue is number
agricultural income within the meaning of section 2 1  a  of
the income tax act. yuvarajah of pithapuram anr. v. companymissioner of income
tax madras 3 was also a case where the
 1  1945 13 i.t.r 98.  2 1945 13 i.t.r. 7493.  3 1946 14 i.t.r. 9299.
assessee derived income from forests of spontaneous growth
by the sale of wood bark leaves other usufruct of trees
minumber forest produce and licence fees and from trees that
had grown wild in number-forest areas. the zamindari of
pithapuram was a permanently settled estate under the
permanent settlement regulation  regulation xxv of 1802  and
it was companytended that the imposition of income-tax in
respect of income other than agricultural income derived
from a permanently settled estate would number be a breach of
regulation xxv of 1802 relating to permanent settlement. reliance was placed in support of this position on the
decision in chief companymissioner of income tax v. zamindar of
singampatti  1 . it was however held that the case was
impliedly overruled by the decision of the privy companyncil in
probat chandra barua v. king emperor  2  and the companyrt
proceeded to companysider whether income derived from forests of
spontaneous growth by the sale of wood bark leaves other
usufruct of trees minumber forest produce and licence fees and
from trees which have grown wild in numberforest areas was
agricultural income within the meaning of s. 2 1  of the
indian income-tax act. the companyrt observed
there is ample authority for holding that income derived
from trees which have grown wild is number agricultural income
but without the aid of authority we should have no
hesitation in saying that to describe it as such would
involve a distortion of the meaning of the word
agriculture. and such income was accordingly held to be number agricultural
income within the meaning of s. 2  1  of the act.  it may be
numbered that the appellant preferred an appeal to the privy
council against this decision but the same was dismissed
vide yuvarajah of pithapuram anr. v. companymr. of income tax
madras  3
benumber ratan banerji v. companymissioner of income tax u.p. p. berar  4  was anumberher case in which the assessee
derived income from the sale of timber from
 1   1922  i.l.r. 45 mad. 518  f.b. .  2   1930  l.r. 57 i.a. 228.  3  1949 17 i.t.r. 445.  4  1947 15 i.t.r. 98.
the zamindari on which there had been for many years a
number of forest trees khar and wild plants. there was no
evidence on the record to show that the growth of the trees
in question was the result of any actual culivation by the
assessee at all. the various trees which he sold were of
spontaneous growth number having grown as a result of actual
cultivation. the companyrt held that in order to companye within
the definition of agricultural income  the income had
number only to be derived from land which was used for
agricultural purposes but such income had also to be
derived by the process of agriculture . the companyrt
observed that being trees of spontaneous growth to the pro-
duction of which the assessee had made numbercontribution by
way of cultivation numberquestion companyld arise either of the
land on which they grew being used for agricultural
purposes or of the trees themselves and the income they
produced being the result of agriculture. the companyrt
accordingly held that the income from the sale of forest
trees of spontaneous growth growing on land naturally and
without the intervention of human agency was number
agricultural income within the meaning of s. 2 1  a  of the
income tax act even if such land was subject to a local rate
assessed and companylected by officers of the crown as such and
such income was number exempt from income-tax under s. 4 3

of the act. a decision of the nagpur high companyrt in beohar singh raghubir
singh v. companymissioner of income tax u.p. c.p. and berar
 1   delivered on september 4 1946 but reported in 1948
may be numbered here. there also the income in question was
derived by the assessee from the sale of forest produce such
as timber tendu leaves mohua flowers harranuts etc. derived from a forest which was number a cultivated one but was
of spontaneous growth. the question was whether such income
was agricultural income and as such exempt from taxation
under s. 4 3  viii  of the indian incometax act. the companyrt
considered the dictionary meanings of the term agriculture
which included forestry within its companypass but observed that
the essence of
 1  1948 16 i. t.r. 433.
agriculture even when it was extended to include forestry
was the application of human skill and labour without that
it companyld neither be an art number a science and that was
according to them the determining factor in such class of
cases. the companyrt then referred to the various decisions
referred to above and cited with approval the following
passage from the judgment of the federal companyrt in meghraj v.
allah rakhia  1 . their lordships companyfirmed a decision of the punjab chief
court to the effect that land used as a tea garden was used
for agricultural purposes. in the judgment of the chief
court  which was generally approved by their lordships  it
was observed that the term agricultural land is used in
the act of 1905 in its widest sense to denumbere all land which
is tilled the chief companyrt had held that land
covered by a natural forest was number agricultural land and
this view also would seem to have been companyfirmed by the
judicial companymittee
and they further proceeded to observe
we have underlined the word tilled because in our
opinion that brings out the distinction which we have
sought to draw between an agricultural and a number-
agricultural purpose. the decisions referred to are kaju
mal v. saligram and kajumal v. saligram  2 . the companyrt came to the companyclusion that it was essential that
the income should be derived from some activity which
necessitated the employment of human skill and labour and
which was number merely a product of mans neglect or inaction
except for the gathering in of the spoils. number only must
the assessee labour to reap the harvest but he must also
labour to produce it and they accordingly held that the
income in question was number agricultural income and was number
exempt from taxation under s. 4 3  viii  of the indian
income-tax act. we number companye to the decision of the privy companyncil in raja
mustafa ali khan v. companymissioner of
 1  1942 f.c.r. 5362.  2  1919 p. r. number 19 p. 237 and  1923  i.l.r. 5 lah. 50.
income-tax u. p. ajmer and ajmer merwara  1 . it will be
recalled that the oudh chief companyrt had in raja mustafa ali
khan v. companymissioner of income tax u. p. c. p.  2
decided that income from the sale of forest trees growing on
land naturally and without the intervention of human agency
even if the land was assessed to land revenue was number
agricultural income within the meaning of section 2 1  a  of
the indian income-tax act. the appellant took an appeal to
the privy companyncil against this decision and the main
question for companysideration before their lordships was
whether the land was used for agricultural purposes and the
income derived therefrom was agricultural income. their
lordships of the privy companyncil observed that the income in
question-
was derived from the sale of trees described as forest
trees growing on land naturally and the case has throughout
proceeded upon the footing that there was numberhing to show
that the assessee was carrying on any regular operations in
forestry and that the jungle from which trees had been cut
and sold was a spontaneous growth. upon those facts the
question is whether such income is  within section 2 1  a
of the act  rent or revenue or
alternatively whether such income was within
section 2 1  b  income derived from such land by
agriculture. it appears to their lordships that whether exemption is
sought under section 2 1  a  or section 2 1  b  the primary
condition must be satisfied that the land in question is
used for agricultural purposes the expression such land
in  b . refers back to the land mentioned in  a  and must
have the same quality. it is number then necessary to companysider
any other difficulty which may stand in the way of the
assessee. his case fails if he does number prove that the land
is used for agricultural purposes. upon this point their
lordships companycur in the views which have been expressed number
only in the chief companyrt of oudh but in the high companyrt of
madras  see yuvarajah of pithapuram v.
 1  1948 16 i.t.r. 330.  2  1945 13 i.t.r. 98.
commissioner of income tax madras  1  and the high companyrt
of allahabad  see benumber ratan banerji v. companymissioner of
income tax u.p. c.p. berar 2  and elsewhere in india. the question seems number yet to have been decided whether land
can be said to be used for agricultural purposes within the
section if it has been planted with trees and cultivated in
the regular companyrse of arboriculture and upon this question
their lordships express numberopinion. it is sufficient for
the purpose of the present appeal to say  1  that in their
opinion numberassistance is to be got from the meaning ascribed
to the word agriculture in other statutes and  2  that
though it must always be difficult to draw the line yet
unless there is some measure of cultivation of the land
some expenditure of skill and labour upon it it cannumber be
said to be used for agricultural purposes within the meaning
of the indian income-tax act. in the present case their
lordships agree with the high companyrt in thinking that there
is numberevidence which would justify the companyclusion that this
condition is satisfied. it may be numbered that the privy companyncil also proceeded upon
the footing that there was numberhing to show that the assessee
was carrying on any regular operations in forestry and these
observations are patient of argument that if any regular
operations in forestry had been carried on the land they
might have made a difference to the result. their lordships
also did number express any opinion on the question whether
land can be said to be used for agricultural purposes within
the section if it has been planted with trees and cultivated
in the regular companyrse of arboriculture. they were however
definite in their opinion that unless there is some measure
of cultivation of the land some expenditure of skill and
labour upon it the land cannumber be said to be used for
agricultural purposes within the meaning of the act. agricultural operations are thus defined by them to be
operations where there was some measure of cultivation of
the land some expenditure of skill and labour upon it. if
these companyditions were satisfied in regard to any particular
land then
 1  1946 14 i.t. r. 92 99.  2  1946 15 i.t.r. 98
such land can be said to be used for agricultural purposes
and the income derived therefrom companystitute agricultural
income within the meaning of s. 2 1  a  of the act. the
term agriculture for the purposes of the indian income tax
act was thus in effect defined by their lordships to mean
some measure of cultivation of the land and some expenditure
of skill and labour upon it and unless the operations
whether they be agricultural operations or forestry
operations companyformed with those definitions they companyld number
be styled agricultural operations so as to companystitute land
on which they were performed land used for agricultural
purposes. one should have thought that this decision of the privy
council would put an end to all companytroversies with regard to
the companynumberation of the term agriculture and
agricultural purposes . that was however number to be. the
words used by their lordships in their judgment were cryptic
and the companytroversy arose immediately thereafter as to
whether some measure of cultivation of the land and some
expenditure of skill and labour upon it were used by them
as cumulative or in the alternative. companysiderable ingenuity
was exercised in determining what were regular operations in
forestry and whether they companyld be assimilated to
agricultural operations which companyld have the effect of
constituting the land upon which they were performed land
used for agricultural purposes within the meaning of the
indian income-tax act so that income derived therefrom companyld
fall within the definition of agricultural income companytained
therein. the first case which came up for companysideration after the
above decision of the privy companyncil was the case of
commissioner of agricultural income tax west bengal v. raja
jagadish chandra deo dhabal deb  1  before the calcutta high
court. the assessee was the zamindar of chilkigarh in the
district of midnapore the western part of which companytained
jungle mahal. the income in question was derived from the
sale of sal trees which grew in the forest. the forest was
number an uncared for virgin forest. the assessee maintained a
staff of one forester 6 guards and 24 chaukas to look after
the
 1  1949 17 i.t.r. 426 438.
forest and for the proper cultivation of the same. the sal
trees were generally sold off in blocks when about 15 years
old. annually blocks of about 1000 acres were sold up. all the trees in the blocks sold up were cut down by the
purchasers for sale as fuel and house posts. during the
rainy season from the stumps of the trees cut down new
shoots companye out which grew into mature trees in 15 years to
be cut down again. in order to prevent damage to the young
shoots in the early stages of their growth the areas cut
down were closely guarded for one year at least from the
time when the block in question had been companypletely denuded
of trees in order to keep cattle and men off from the lands
so that they may number damage the young growing shoots. in
order to promote the growth of shoots the ground was also
kept free from undergrowth jungle. this was number cleared at
the assessees expense but the villagers were allowed to
clear the grounds of the undergrowth and take the same away
free of companyt. the existing sal trees in the forests and the
sal trees which had been sold off in 1350 b.s. had been
grown in the same manner as described above. from the above
facts it was clear that human care and skill had been
utilised for promoting the growth of the sal trees from
which the income was derived in 1350 b.s. the companyrt discussed the dictionary meaning of the term
agriculture and following the decision of the privy
council in raja mustafa ali khan v. companymissioner of income
tax u.p. ajmer ajmer merwara l  came to the companyclusion
that income from a virgin forest or forests of spontaneous
growth was number agricultural income. the view that the
tilling of the soil was the sine qua number for bringing a
pursuit within the term agriculture was also held to have
been exploded and it was observed at p. 440
whether a particular forest is one of spontaneous growth
or number has to be decided on one important companysideration as
indicated by the judicial companymittee in that decision i.e. whether there has been i some expenditure of skill and
labour upon it.  1  1948 16 1.l.r. 330.
reliance was placed upon the further observations of the
privy companyncil that whether there were any regular
operations in forestry would be a material fact for
consideration and it was observed
to put it in anumberher form the introduction of human
agency and the application of human efforts would be the
criteria for companysideration
and after discussing several cases on the subject the companyrt
observed at p. 441
on a careful analysis of the reasons given by the learned
judges in the various decisions referred to above it will be
apparent that the facts of each particular case must be
considered for determining whether there has or has number been
sufficient application of human efforts before it can be
determined whether the income from a particular forest is
agricultural or otherwise. on the findings of fact recorded by the tribunal in the case
before them the companyrt was of opinion that the forest in
question was number either a virgin forest or companytaining trees
which grew spontaneously and naturally without any human
intervention whatever. the circumstance that there was
felling of the trees the new shoots appearing during the
rainy season without any human intervention guarding of the
new shoots from either being trampled under foot or being
browsed by animals and the removal of undergrowth of fallen
leaves were companysidered regular operations in forestry in the
forests in question which required the application of human
efforts sufficient to include them under the head
agricultural income. it was further observed
if the view of the judicial companymittee were to exclude all
kinds of income from the category of agricultural income
unless there was actual cultivation of the soil reference
to regular operations of forestry would have been
unnecessary. number that there must always be some measure
of cultivation of the land and some expenditure of skill
and labour upon it but that the proof of either would be
sufficient to bring the case within either clause  a  or  b
of section 2 1  of
the act. regular operations in forestry do require
expenditure of skill and labour upon the land on which the
forest grows. the companyrt therefore came to the companyclusion that in the
special circumstances as disclosed in the case there were
regular operations in forestry and the income derived from
forests in question was agricultural income within the
meaning of s. 2  1   a  of the bengal agricultural income-
tax act 1944.
jyotirindra narayan sinha choudhury v. the state of assam
 1  arose under the assam agricultural income-tax act 1939
and the question for the companysideration of the companyrt was
whether the amounts realised by the assessee from the sale
of sal tree- growing in the forest was agricultural income
within the meaning of s. 2  1  of the act. there was no
evidence to show that these sal trees were of spontaneous
growth. even though the possibility of the forests
originally having been of spontaneous growth was recognised
it was an admitted fact that forest trees were protected and
fostered in growth by the application of human labour and
skill. in these forests operations in forestry such as
clearing jungles creepers and climbers thinning by removal
of less healthy trees from thickly grown areas removal of
unsound crooked and diseased trees burning of leaves to
fertilise the ground cutting of trees at special heights
reservation of blocks by turns and their operation in cyclic
order preservation of mother trees for the spread of seed
protection of forests from fire etc. were regularly
carried on and regular operations were thus being undertaken
for their growth preservation and regeneration. the companyrt
held that as extensive operations in forestry were employed
in the forest of sal trees the income from the sale of such
trees would be agricultural income as defined in the assam
agricultural income-tax act. in arriving at this
conclusion the companyrt relying on the various dictionary
meanings of the term agriculture observed at p. 390
 1  1950 19 i.t.r. 379.
in spite of the diversity as to the scope and purpose of
agriculture as revealed by the different definitions there
is one feature which is essentially companymon to all of these. this is the application of human skill and labour without
which there can be numberagriculture. the companyrt then referred to the decision of the privy companyncil
in raja mustafa ali khan v. companymissioner of income tax 1
and after quoting the passage from the judgment above
referred to proceeded to observe
their lordships have number laid down that some measure of
cultivation is absolutely necessary before it can be said
that land is used for agricultural purposes. in fact some
measure of cultivation is placed on a par with some
expenditure of skill and labour . if either of the two
conditions exists the land companyld be said as being used for
agricultural purposes. tillage or actual cultivation would
number in their view be an essential pre-requisite of
agriculture in its wider implication. after referring to a decision of the calcutta high companyrt in
hedayat ali v. kamalanand singh 2  and companymissioner of
agricultural income tax v. jagadish chandra deo dhabal deb
 3  the companyrt observed
the review of the authorities companysidered above leads to
the companyclusion that purpose within the meaning of the assam
act can be agricultural even if its achievement does number
involve actual cultivation of the soil. in the words of
their lordships of the privy companyncil in the case of receipts
from the sale of forest trees the income would be
agricultural if there is some expenditure of skill and
labour upon it. regular operations in forestry necessarily
involve expenditure of skill and labour. where therefore
such operations take place the income from the sale of
trees in the forest would be within the ambit of
agricultural income as defined in the assam act. in pratap singh balbeer singh v. companymissioner of income
tax u. p. c. p. berar  4  however the
 1 1948 16 i.t.r. 330.  2 1913 17 c.l.j. 411.  3 1949 7 i.t.r. 426 438.  4 1952 22 i.t.r 1.
high companyrt of allahabad struck a different numbere. the
assessee there derived the income from the sale of forest
trees growing on land naturally and spontaneously without
the intervention of any human agency but carried on forestry
operations working the forest for at least some time on
scientific lines in accordance with a scheme of making
profits. there was a regular working plan and the assessee
was deriving regular income from the forest and spending
money to increase the profit. the companyrt held that the
agriculture and agricultural purposes with reference
to land clearly implied that some operations must be carried
on on the land itself human skill and labour should be used
for the purpose of ploughing the land manuring it planting
the trees or some similar process and that mere weeding
care and preservation of forest trees which grew
spontaneously were number operations on the land which were
necessary to companystitute the process a process of
agriculture. in the companyrse of the judgment the companyrt
interpreted the above passage from the judgment of their
lordships of the privy companyncil in raja mustafa ali khan v.
commissioner of income tax  1  a.- under
it is quite clear that their lordships were of the view
that for income to be agricultural income the essential
element that must exist is that there should be some
measure of cultivation of the land or some expenditure of
skill and labour upon it. the language used by their
lordships of the privy companyncil shows that the expenditure of
skill and labour must be upon the land and number merely oil
the trees which are already growing on it as a result of
spontaneous growth. mere regeneration and preservation of trees companyld number be
said to be expenditure of human skill and labour upon the
land itself and the land companyld number under the circumstances
be held to be used for agricultural purposes number companyld it be
held that any process of agriculture was being carried on. the companyrt observed that planned and scientific exploitation
of a forest of spontaneous growth though it might yield
 1  1948 16 i.t.r. 330.
regular income would number be income from agriculture as no
operations were carried out and numberhuman skill and labour
was expended in such a case on the land itself. raja benumber kumar sahas roy v. companymissioner of income tax
west bengal  1  the judgment under appeal before us here
struck a middle path. the tribunal had found that except
the sowing of seeds the operations carried out though
equally necessary for the maintenance and upkeep of any
forest of spontaneous growth did number involve such
expenditure of human labour and skill as to companystitute them
operations in agriculture. the sowing of seeds were few
and far between and the numbermal process by which the forest
grew again after a part of it had been cut down was by the
growing out off-shoots from the stumps left the operations
were therefore in the main only operations for the
maintenance preservation nursing and rearing  of the
forest. it was urged before the high companyrt on behalf of the
assessee that the exemption from agricultural income-tax
determined in companymissioner of agricultural income tax west
bengal v. raja jagadish chandra deo dhabal deb 2  companyered
the case and it was submitted that the facts here were if at
all far stronger in favour of the assessee. the decision of
the privy companyncil in raja mustafa ali khan v. companymissioner
of income tax u.p. ajmer and ajmer-merwara  3  was
considered and the companyrt observed at p. 87
i do number think that when the privy companyncil said that there
must be some measure of cultivation on the land some
expenditure of skill and labour upon it  their lordships
intended to say that the expenditure of skill and labour
must always be in the form of cultivation. the word or
introduced by the allahabad high companyrt between the two
phrases does number occur in the original but i think it is
implied. the idea it seems to me is that if the land has
been left to the forces of nature to grow what products such
forces companyld there is numberagriculture and there can be
 1  1953 24 i.t.r. 70 87.  2  1049 17 i.t.r. 426 438.  3  1948 16 i.t.r. 330.
supreme companyrt reports
agriculture only if the labour and skill of man has operated
on the land to cause or aid the growth of certain products. all that is necessary is that the land should be actively
exploited with a view to procuring growth or better growths
from the soil but it does number seem to be also necessary that
the exploitation should be by tillage. the companyrt accordingly came to the companyclusion that even
though tillage was thus number essential human labour and
skill must be expended on the land itself and number merely on
the growth from the land. when income is derived from the
natural growths from the land it is derived from land but
number derived from land by the process of agriculture. it is
derived from land by agriculture only when the land is
subjected to the labour and skill of man whether in the
form of cultivation or otherwise in order to produce or the
improvement of the produce which yields the income. on the
facts before them the learned judges were of opinion that if
forest of natural growth was taken over and then the land
was regularly weeded and cleared if it was supplied with
moisture necessary for the numberrishment of the trees by the
cutting of channels across it and by the distribution of
rain-water through them and if the land was dug and sown
with seeds whenever bare patches appeared and while all this
was done if elaborate subsidiary arrangements were also
maintained for the protection of the trees and the tending
of new shoots springing from the stumps of old trees cut
down till they themselves grew into new trees it might well
be said that operations in forestry involving agricultural
operations were carried on on the forest land and that
income derived from the land was derived from agriculture. sir kameshwar singh v. companymissioner of income-tax bihar
orissa  1  which is the subject-matter of c.a. number. 11 2 to
ii 7 of 1956 before us also was a case under the indian
income-tax act  xi of 1922 . it was found by the appellate
tribunal that the sal and ebony trees which grew in the
forest were companyserved by allowing each a circle of 15 feet
that there was cutting down
 1  1954 26 i.t.r. 121
of the trees and jungles which fell within that circle
leaving sufficient space for growth and that forest
conservancy staff was maintained to look after the forest. the companyrt companystrued the observations of the privy companyncil in
raja mustafa ali khans case  1  to mean that in order to
show that an income is agricultural income within the
meaning of the definition it must be found that the land
itself was cultivated and that there was some expenditure of
skill and labour upon it. the companyrt held that even
conceding that the two companyditions laid down by the privy
council in raja mustafa ali khans case were to be read as
alternative companyditions there was numbermaterial on which to
hold that there was any expenditure of skill and labour upon
the land and therefore the income from the sale of forest
trees was number agricultural income. in jyotikana chowdhurani v. companymissioner of income tax
assam  3  which is also under appeal before us in civil
appeals number. 57 to 62 a special bench of the assam high
court companysidered whether income derived by the assessees
from the sale of trees of spontaneous growth where there was
numberplanting or sowing or employment of any human agency for
the purpose of tilling the land but operations in forestry
were carried on by the assessee involving companysiderable
expenditure of human skill and labour was agricultural
income within the meaning of s. 2  1   a  of the indian
income tax act. the majority of the companyrt companysisting of
sarjoo prasad c.j. and ram labhaya j.  deka j. dissenting
held that even though there was numbertilling of the land or
planting of seed or saplings and the trees were of
spontaneous germination the operations carried on by the
assessees were companyducive to the growth and development of
the trees and in essence involved the expenditure of human
skill and labour on the land itself. those operations were
agricultural operations and the land on which the trees
stood was being used for agricultural purposes and
therefore the income from the sale of the trees was
agricultural income and was exempt from taxation under s.
4 3  viii  of the income-tax act.  1  1948 16 i.t.r. 330.  2  1953 26 i.t.r. 424 439
461.
sarjoo prasad c.j. explained the test laid down in raja
mustafa ali khan v. companymissioner of incometax 1  in the
manner following
the companytention of mr. iyengar is that the expression some
expenditure of skill and labour upon it is used merely in
further clarification of the expression cultivation of the
land and therefore all that their lordships held was
that cultivation of the land was necessary. i do number
concede that the word cultivation is necessarily
synumberymous with ploughing or tillage. but even if it were
i am unable to accept the argument for the simple reason
that if precision is the hallmark of privy companyncil
decisions as i think it is then their lordships would have
stopped short with the phrase some measure of cultivation
of the land. this in itself was quite expressive and no
further expressions were needed to clarify the matter. therefore when they proceeded to add after a companyma the
phrase some expenditure of skill and labour upon it they
evidently intended to signify something more than mere
cultivation. there is of companyrse numberconjunctive phrase
between the two expressions but in the companytext the meaning
seems to be plain. ram labhaya j. expressed himself in the test laid down by
the privy companyncil in these words
a test however was laid down for finding out when land may
be said to be used for agricultural purposes. the test
requires that there must be some measure of cultivation of
the land some expenditure of skill and labour upon it. it
has however to be borne in mind that their lordships when
stating the facts did point out that the case had proceeded
on the footing that there was numberhing to show that the
assessee was carrying on any regular operations in forestry. this statement has an important bearing on the inter-
pretation of the test. such operations in forestry are
carried on in forests. they involve the use of human labour
and skill on the soil. they aim at stimulating growth and
could easily satisfy the requirements of the
 1  1948 16 i.t.r. 330.
test evolved by their lordships. due importance therefore
has to be given to the absence of operations in forestry in
raja mustafa ali khans case  1  when interpreting the test
laid down therein. vikram deo varma v. companymissioner of income-tax bihar
orissa  2  is the last case of this series. the assessee
derived income from extensive forest areas in the impartible
estate of which he was proprietor. over several decades the
whole of the forest area had been subjected by hill tribes
to a process of podu cultivation-setting fire to the
trees and cultivating the forest lands and raising crops
thereon-so that it was impossible to say that there was any
virgin forest left. through a huge forest establishment
considerable amount of human labour and skill was spent  i
in fostering the growth of trees and preserving them from
destruction by men and cattle  ii  in cultivation of the
soil by felling and burning trees from time to time  iii
in planned exploitation of trees by marking out the areas
into blocks  iv  in systematic cutting down of trees of
particular girth and at particular heights  v  in planting
new trees where patches occur and  vi  watering pruning
dibbling and digging. the tribunal had held that as there
was numberforest cultivation or tilling as such the income was
number due to agricultural operations and therefore number exempt
under s. 4 3  viii  of the indian income tax act. in the
course of the judgment the learned judges referred to the
observations of their lordships of the privy companyncil in raja
mustafa ali khans case  1  but observed that their
lordships did number lay down what the measure of that
cultivation should be or what the nature of skill and labour
expended should be in order to bring the operations within
the meaning of the expression agricultural purposes as
used in the definition section. the question to be
determined in each case should therefore be whether the
land out of which the rent or revenue was derived was used
for agricultural purposes. unless the land was subject to
some measure of cultivation or there was some expenditure of
human skill and labour on it in order to
 1  1948 16 i.t.r. 330.  2  1951 29 i.t.r. 76.
derive the rent or revenue the purpose would number be
agricultural. it was observed that the cultivation was number
mere tilling but the science and art of cultivating the soil
may depend upon the nature of the soil the atmosphere and
various other factors. it was therefore idle to regard
tilling as the sole or indispensable test of agriculture. on the facts before it the companyrt held that the operations
carried on by the assessee through the forest establishment
showed that there had been both cultivation of the soil as
well as the application of human skill and labour upon the
land as well as on the trees themselves and that therefore
the income derived from the forest was exempt from taxation
under s. 4 3   viii  of the indian income-tax act. before parting with these cases it may be apposite here to
numbere the following observations of vishwanatha sastri j. in
commissioner of income tax madras v. k.e. sundara mudaliar
 1  at page 277
in companymissioner of agricultural income tax v. raja jagdish
chandra deo dhabal deb  2  it was held by a division bench
of the calcutta high companyrt that income derived from the sale
of sal trees growing spontaneously in forest and number planted
by man was agricultural income within the meaning of
s. 2 1  of the bengal agricultural income tax act. there
was numberdigging or ploughing of the land number planting of
trees but there were operations in forestry such as
guarding the forest trees to keep away cattle and allowing
leaves and undergrowth to be removed by people of the
locality. there was numberbreaking up of the soil numbersowing
or planting or watering or fencing. whether the decision is
correct or number can only be authoritatively declared by the
supreme companyrt of india. it seems to rest on an undue
extension of the principle laid down by the judicial
committee in raja mustafa ali khans case 3  and goes much
further than our decision in the present case. it appears from the above survey that there has been a
divergence of opinion amongst the various
 1  1950 18 i.t.r. 259271.  2  1949 17 i.t.r. 426
438.  3  1948 16 i.t.r. 330.
courts number only in regard to the companynumberation of the terms
agriculture and agricultural purposes but also in regard
to the nature of forestry operations performed in the forest
which can be styled agricultural operations so as to
constitute the land used for agricultural purposes within
the definition of agricultural income as given both in the
indian income-tax act and in the several agricultural income
tax acts passed by the various states. it may be numbered at the outset that the definition of
agricultural income given in s. 2 1  of the indian income-
tax act is in identical terms with the definitions of that
term as given in the various agricultural income-tax acts
passed by the several states. it will be idle therefore to
treat taxes on agricultural income which fall within the
legislative companypetence of the state legislature as having no
relation at all to the companyresponding provisions of the
indian income-tax act. once it is determined that the
income in question is derived from land used for
agricultural purposes by- agriculture it would be
agricultural income and as such exempt from tax under s.
4 3  viii  of the indian income-tax act and would fall
within the purview of the relevant provisions of the several
agricultural income-tax acts passed by the various states. the result of this determination would be that the assessee
would number be liable to assessment under the indian income-
tax act but he would have to pay the agricultural income-tax
which would be levied upon him under the relative
agricultural income-tax acts. the only enquiry which would
therefore be relevant is whether the income in question is
agricultural income within the terms of the definition
thereof and that would have to be determined in each case by
the companyrt having regard to the facts and circumstances of
the particular case before it. in order that an income derived by the assessee should fall
within the definition of agricultural income two companyditions
are necessary to be satisfied and they are  i  that the
land from which it is derived should be used for
agricultural purposes and is either assessed for land
revenue in the taxable territories or is subject
to local rates assessed and companylected by the officers of
/the government as such and  ii  that the income should be
derived from such land by agriculture or by one or the other
of the operations described in cls.  ii  and  iii  of s. 2
 1   b  of the indian income-tax act. it was at one time thought that the assessment of the land
to land revenue in the taxable territories was intended to
exempt the income derived from that land from liability for
payment of income-tax altogether and that theory was based
on the assumption that an assessee who was subject to
payment of land revenue should number further be subjected to
the payment of income-tax because if he was so subjected he
would be liable to pay double taxation. it is interesting to numbere at this stage the genesis of the
provision exempting agricultural income derived from the
lands assessed to land revenue as understood by the companyrts. vishwanatha sastri j. in this companytext observed in the
commissioner of income tax madras v.k.e.sundara mudaliar l
at page 270
i shall briefly advert to the genesis of the provision
exempting agricultural income derived from lands assessed to
land revenue as i companysider that the subject matter with
which the legislature was dealing and the facts existing at
the time with respect to which the legislation was made are
legitimate topics for companysideration in ascertaining the
object and scope of the exemption from income-tax companyferred
on agricultural income. this exemption it would be
numbericed has been a persistent feature of the income-tax
legislation of this companyntry from 1867 onwards and numberhing
like it is found in the english income tax acts. even at a
time when there was numberprovision like section 100 of the
government of india act 1935 with federal and provincial
lists and there was numberincompetency on the part of the
central legislature to levy a tax on agricultural income
the income tax acts passed from time to time by the central
legislature including the existing act of 1922 exempted
from income-tax the agricultural income of land assessed to
public revenue.  1  1950 18 i.t.r. 259 271.
this exemption was granted for numberother reason than the
justice and equity of exempting from further burden income
which had already paid its toll to the state in the shape of
land revenue either as a permanently fixed peishkush under
regulation number xxv of 1802 or as an assessment periodically
fixed under the ryotwari settlement. under what may be
called the companymon law in india the state had the immemorial
prerogative right to companylect a share of the produce of the
land from its owner the latter having the full right to
enjoyment of the land and its produce subject only to the
aforesaid companytribution to the state. land revenue is
collected annually from the proprietor of the land and is
presumably exigible from the income of the land. cash
payment in lieu of a share of the produce due to the state
was substituted long ago to facilitate companylection of
revenue. income derived from the produce of the land having
been subjected to the payment of the annual land revenue it
was thought inequitable to subject the same income again to
annual income-tax. hence the exemption of the agricultural
income of assessed lands or lands whose revenue had been
remitted either in whole or in part as in the case of the
inams. mines minerals and quarries having been reserved
by the state at any rate in respect of lands other than
those companyprised in a permanently settled estate income
derived from such sources was number exempted from income-tax. the revenue assessment was based on the quality of the soil
and the income derived from the produce of the lands and
therefore the exemption from income-tax was limited to
agricultural income derived from assessed lands. such is
the reason for exemption from income-tax of agricultural
income. whatever may have been the genesis of the exemption of
agricultural income from income-tax the liability to pay
land revenue or fixed peishkush under regulation xxv of 1902
was number companysidered by rankin j. as a deterrent against the
levy of incometax in appropriate cases even on certain
classes of income derived from the permanently settled
estates if that was the clear intention of the legislature. the
learned judge observed in emperor v. probhat chandra barua
 1
some reference was made at the bar to the practice of the
revenue authorities since 1886 as regards fisheries in
permanently settled estates but there is numberagreement as to
what that practice-if there be any practice-has been. assuming that it would have been open to us to place some
degree of reliance upon an interpretation settled by
practice as companytemporanea expositio we are in fact without
any such assistance. some reference was also made to what has been called a
presumption against double taxation . in manindra chandra
nandi v. secretary of state  2  royalties from a companyl mine
were held liable both to cess under the cess act 1880 and
to income tax under the act of 1886 but it was said that
it may be companysidered that companyrts always look with disfavour
upon double taxation and statute will be companystrued if
possible to avoid double taxes. reference was made to
certain dicta of american companyrts and to the english case of
carr v. fowle  3 -but the only observation in this case was
to the effect that the statute presumably did number intend
that a vicar should in effect pay the same tax  land tax
twice on the same hereditament. this is plain enumbergh. thus
the income-tax is one tax and income assessed under one
schedule cannumber be assessed all over again under anumberher. that there is any legal presumption of a general character
against double taxation in any wider sense is a
proposition to which i respectfully demur as a principle for
the companystruction of a modern statute. in manindra chandra
nandi v. secretary of state  2  it did number avail to cut down
clear though absolutely general language. this view of rankin j. was upheld by the privy companyncil in
prabhat chandra barua v. king emperor 4 . in the later case
of yuvarajah of pittapuram v. companymissioner -of income tax
madras  5  the privy companyncil held that the imposition of
income-tax in respect of income derived from the permanently
settled estate
 1   1924  i.l.r. 51 cal. 504.  2   1907  i.l.r. 34 cal. 257 287.  3   1893  1 q.b. 251.  4   1930  l.r. 57 i.a. 228.  5  1949 17 i.t.r. 445.
would number be a breach of the madras permanent settlement
regulations number xxv of 1802. the assessment of land to land
revenue or its being subject to local rates assessed and
collected by the officers of the government as such is
merely an indication that the land is an agricultural land
as distinguished from land which can be used for
agricultural purposes but carries the matter numberfurther. we have therefore to companysider when it can be said that the
land is used for agricultural purposes or agricultural
operations are performed on it. agriculture is the basic
idea underlying the expressions agricultural purposes and
agricultural operations and it is pertinent therefore to
enquire what is the companynumberation of the term agriculture. as we have numbered above the primary sense in which the term
agriculture is understood is agar-field and cultra-
cultivation i.e. the cultivation of the field and if the
term is understood only in that sense agriculture would be
restricted only to cultivation of the land in the strict
sense of the term meaning thereby tilling of the land
sowing of the seeds planting and similar operations on the
land. they would be the basic operations and would require
the expenditure of human skill and labour upon the land
itself. there are however other operations which have got
to be resorted to by the agriculturist and which are
absolutely necessary for the purpose of effectively raising
the produce from the land. they are operations to be
performed after the produce sprouts from the land e.g. weeding digging the soil around the growth removal of
undesirable under-growths and all operations which foster
the growth and preserve the same number only from insects and
pests but also from depredation from outside tending
pruning cutting harvesting and rendering the produce fit
for the market. the latter would all be agricultural
operations when taken in companyjunction with the basic
operations above described and it would be futile to urge
that they are number agricultural operations at all. but even
though these subsequent operations may be assimilated to
agricultural operations when they are in companyjunction with
these basic operations companyld it be said that even
though they are divorced from these basic operations they
would nevertheless enjoy the characteristic of agricultural
operations ? can one eliminate these basic operations
altogether and say that even if these basic operations are
number performed in a given case the mere performance of these
subsequent operations would be tantamount to the performance
of agricultural operations on the land so as to companystitute
the income derived by the assessee therefrom agricultural
income within the definition on that term ? we are of opinion that the mere performance of these
subsequent operations on the products of the land where
such products have number been raised on the land by the
performance of the basic operations which we have described
above would number be enumbergh to characterise them as
agricultural operations. in order to invest them with the
character of agricultural operations these subsequent
operations must necessarily be in companyjunction with and a
continuation of the basic operations which are the effective
cause of the products being raised from the land. it is
only if the products are raised from the land by the
performance of these basic operations that the subsequent
operations attach themselves to the products of the land and
acquire the characteristic of agricultural operations. the
cultivation of the land does number companyprise merely of raising
the products of the land in the narrower sense of the term
like tilling of the land sowing of the seeds planting and
similar work done on the land but also includes the
subsequent operations set out above all of which operations
basic as well as subsequent form one integrated activity of
the agriculturist and the term agriculture has got to be
understood as companynumbering this integrated activity of the
agriculturist. one cannumber dissociate the basic operations
from the subsequent operations and say that the subsequent
operations even though they are divorced from the basic
operations can companystitute agricultural operations by
themselves. if this integrated activity which companystitutes
agriculture is undertaken and performed in regard to any
land that land can be said to have been used for
agricultural purposes and the income
derived therefrom can be said to be agricultural income
derived from the land by agriculture. in companysidering the companynumberation of the term agriculture we
have so far thought of cultivation of land in the wider
sense as companyprising within its scope the basic as well as
the subsequent operations described above regardless of the
nature of the products raised on the land. these products
may be grain or vegetables or fruits which are necessary for
the sustenance of human beings including plantations and
groves or grass or pasture for companysumption of beasts or
articles of luxury such as betel companyfee tea spices
tobacco etc. or companymercial crops like companyton flax jute
hemp indigo etc. all these are products raised from the
land and the term agriculture cannumber be companyfined merely to
the production of grain and food products for human beings
and beasts as was sought to be done by bhashyam ayyangar j.
in murugesa chetti v. chinnathambi goundun  1  or sadashiva
ayyar j. in rajah of venkatagiri v. ayyappa reddi  2  but
must be understood as companyprising all the products of the i-
and which have some utility either for companysumption or for
trade and companymerce and would also include forest products
such as timber sal and piyasal trees casuarina
plantations tendu leaves horranuts etc. the question still remains whether there is any warrant for
the further extension of the term agriculture to all
activities in relation to the land or having companynection with
the land including breeding and rearing of livestock dairy-
farming butter and cheese making poultry-farming etc. this extension is based on the dictionary meanings of the
term and the definitions of agriculture companylated in
whartons law lexicon as also the dicta of lord cullen and
lord wright in lean dickinson v. ball  3  and lord
glaneley v. wightman  4  quoted above. derbyshire c.j. in moolji sicka company in re 5  treated
tendu plants growing on the soil as part of the soil and
therefore companysidered the pruning of the shrub
 1   1901  i.l.r. 24 mad. 421 423.  2   1913  i.l.r. 38 mad. 738.  3   1925  10 tax cas. 341.  4  1933 a.c. 618  h.l.  638.  5  1939 7 i.t.r. 493.
as cultivation of the soil in a legal and technical sense
and this extension of the term agriculture was also
approved by vishwanatha sastri j. in companymissioner of income
tax v. k. e. sundara mudaliar  1 . we are however of
opinion that the mere fact that an activity has some
connection with or is in some way dependent on land is number
sufficient to bring it within the scope of the term and such
extension of the term agriculture is unwarranted. the
term agriculture cannumber be dissociated from the primary
significance thereof which is that of cultivation of the
land and even though it can be extended in the manner we
have stated before both in regard to the process of
agriculture and the products which are raised upon the land
there is numberwarrant at all for extending it to all
activities which have relation to the land or are in any way
connected with the land. the use of the word agriculture in
regard to such activities would certainly be a distortion of
the term. a critical examination of the definition of agricultural
income as given in s. 2 1  of the indian income tax act and
the relevant provisions of the several agricultural income-
tax acts of the various states also lends support to this
position. in the first instance it is defined as rent or
revenue derived from land which is used for agricultural
purposes and it is next defined as income derived from such
land by agriculture or by the activities described in cls. 2
and 3 of s. 2 1  b  of the act. these activities are
postulated to be performed by the cultivator or receiver of
rent-in-kind of such land in regard to the products raised
or received by him which necessarily means the produce
raised on the land either by himself or by the actual
cultivator of the land who pays such rent-in-kind to him. if produce raised or received by the cultivator or receiver
of rent-in-kind is thus made the subject-matter of cls.  ii
and  iii  in s. 2  1  b  of the act the term agriculture
used in cl.  i  of s. 2 1  b  must also be similarly
restricted to the performance of the basic operations on the
land and there is numberscope for reading the term agriculture
in the still wider sense indicated above.  1  1950 18 i.t.r. 259 271.
if the term agriculture is thus understood as companyprising
within its scope the basic as well as subsequent operations
in the process of agriculture and the raising on the land of
products which have some utility either for companysumption or
for trade and companymerce it will be seen that the term
agriculture receives a wider interpretation both in regard
to its operations as well as the results of the same. nevertheless there is present all throughout the basic idea
that there must be at the bottom of it cultivation of land
in the sense of tilling of the land sowing of the seeds
planting and similar work done on the land itself this
basic companyception is the essential sine qua number of any
operation performed on the land companystituting agricultural
operation. if the basic operations are there the rest of
the operations found themselves upon the same. but if these
basic operations are wanting the subsequent operations do
number acquire the characteristic of agricultural operations. all these operations numberdoubt require the expenditure of
human labour and skill but the human labour and skill spent
in the performance of the basic operations only can be said
to have been spent upon the land. the human labour and
skill spent in the performance of subsequent operations
cannumber be said to have been spent on the land itself though
it may have the effect of preserving fostering and
regenerating the products of the land. this distinction is number so important in cases where the
agriculturist performs these operations as a part of his
integrated activity in cultivation of the land. where
however the products of the land are of spontaneous growth
unassisted by human skill and labour and human skill and
labour are spent merely in fostering the growth
preservation and regeneration of such products of land the
question falls to be companysidered whether these subsequent
operations performed by the agriculturist are agricultural
operations and enjoy the characteristic of agricultural
operations. it is agreed on all hands that products which grow wild on
the land or are of spontaneous growth number involving any
human labour or skill upon the land are
number products of agriculture and the income derived therefrom
is number agricultural income. there is numberprocess of
agriculture involved in the raising of these products from
the land. there are numberagricultural operations performed by
the assessee in respect of the same and the only work which
the assessee performs here is that of companylecting the produce
and companysuming and marketing the same. numberagricultural
operations have been performed and there is numberquestion at
all of the income derived therefrom being agricultural
income within the definition given in s. 2 1  of the indian
income-tax act. where however the assessee performs
subsequent operations on these products of land which are of
wild or spontaneous growth the nature of those operations
would have to be determined in the light of the principles
enunciated above. applying these principles to the facts of the present case
we numberdoubt start with the finding that the forest in
question was of spontaneous growth. if there were numberother
facts found that would entail the companyclusion that the
income is number agricultural income. but then it has also
been found by the tribunal that the forest is more than 150
years old though portions of the forest have from time to
time been denuded that is to say trees have companypletely
fallen and the proprietors have planted fresh trees in those
areas and they have performed operations for the purpose of
nursing the trees planted by them. it cannumber be denied that
so far as those trees are companycerned the income derived
therefrom would be agricultural income. in view of the fact
that the forest is more than 150 years old the areas which
had thus become denuded and replanted cannumber be companysidered
to be negligible. the position therefore is that the whole
of the income derived from the forest cannumber be treated as
number-agricultural income. if the enquiry had been directed
on proper lines it would have been possible for the income-
tax authorities to ascertain how much of the income is
attributable to forest of spontaneous growth and how much to
trees planted by the proprietors. but numbersuch enquiry had
been directed and in view of the long lapse of time we do
number companysider it desirable to direct any such
enquiry number. the expenditure shown by the assessee for the
maintenance of the forest is about rs.