UNION OF INDIAversusBELGACHI TEA CO. LTD. & ORS.

   52       SUPREME COURT REPORTS               [2008] 8 S.C.R.


A come assessed by the Assessing Officer under the 1961
  Act; and the income derived from sale of green tea leaves
  is agricultural income and assessable under the 1944 Act.
       In appeal to this Court, assessee contended that the
  sale proceeds of green tea leaves should be treated inci-
B dental to business and its income should be computed
  under the provisions of the 1961 Act.
        Disposing of the appeal, the Court
         HELD: 1.1. There is no dispute on the fact that from
C the income assessed, 60% is taxable by the State under
  the Bengal Agricultural Income Tax Act, 1944 and 40% is
  taxable by the Centre under the Income Tax Act, 1961.
  The object behind taxing the 60% and 40% share of the
  income assessed appears that there are common ex-
D penses on establishment and staff for two different ac-
  tivities that is tl?a grown and tea manufactured. There -.:an
  be independent income from sale of green tea leaves and
  by sale of tea, that is, after processing of green tea leaves
  when green tea leaves become tea for use. Income from
E agriculture is taxable by the State and sale of tea after
  manufacturing is taxable by the Union of India as busi-
  ness income. To segregate income and expenses from
  two combined activities of assessee is not possible, but
  at the same time there cannot be two assessments of in-
F come by two different authorities. Therefore, there can
  be only one assessment of income from the tea business.
  [Paras 11, 12] [57-E-H, 58-A]
       1.2 For the purpose of tax on agricultural income, the
  Agricultural Income Tax Officer will go by the assessment
G order made under the provisions of the 1961 Act and the
  contents of the assessment for the year made by the As-
  sessing Officer under the 1961 Act shall be conclusive evi-
  dence of the contents of such order and he has to go by the
  assessment and tax only 60% income made under the as-
H sessment for the purpose of the 1944 Act. [Para 15] [59-E,F]
                     UNION OF INDIA & ANR. v.                  53
                  BELGACHI TEA CO. LTD. & ORS.

)(         1.3 It is true that both rule 8 of the Income Tax Rules, A
     1962 and s.8 of the 1944 Act provide how the mixed in-
     come from the growing tea leaves and tea manufacturing
     can be taxed. Mixed income means the income derived
     by an assessee from the combined activities i.e. growing
     of tea leaves and manufacturing of tea. Therefore, for the s
     purpose of computation of income under the 1961 Act, it
     should be the mixed income from 'tea grown and manu-
     factured' by the assessee. [Para 19] [61-C,D,E]
          1.4. If the income is by sale of green tea leaves by the
     assessee it cannot be called income assessable under C
     the 1961 Act for the purpose of 40:60 share between the
     Centre and the State. In both the provisions i.e. rule 8 of
     the Income Tax Rules, 1962 and s.8 of the 1944 Act, the
     word used is income derived from the sale of 'tea grown
     and manufactured'. The income from sale of green tea D
     leaves is purely income from the agricultural product.
     There is no question of taxing it as incidental income of
     the assessee when there is a specific provision and au-
     thority to tax that income i.e. the State, under the 1944
     Act. In this view of the matter, the agricultural income E
     cannot be taxed under 1961 Act. [Paras 20, 21) [61-E,F,G]
          2. It is also pertinent to mention that the Income Tax
     Officer has assessed the income of tea manufactured by
     the assessee from 1977-78 to 1980-81 to the tune of
     Rs.1,44,250/-, Rs.4,28,040/-, Rs.54,450/- and Rs.92,351 /- F
     respectively and income of the assessee from the sale of
     green tea leaves was more than Rs.10 lakhs in each ac-
     counting year (1977-78 and 1978-79). In this view of the
     matter, the income of the assessee from the sale of tea
     leaves can never be incidental to business. In a given G
     case the assessee can process only 10% of green tea
     leaves and 90% of green tea leaves can be sold directly
     in the market. That income from sale of green tea leaves
     cannot be treated incidental to the business. In case the
                                                                 H
    54       SUPREME COURT REPORTS                [2008] 8 S.C.R.

                                                                    )<
A assessee directly sells the green tea leaves resulting into
  an income from agricultural products, it cannot be taken
  as incidental income to the business and whatever the
  income is derived from the sale of the green tea leaves
  can be assessed by the Agricultural Income Tax Officer
B under the 1944 Act. [Paras 22,23,24] [62-A,B,C,D,E]
         *Tata Tea Ltd. & Anr v. State of West Bengal & Ors.
                                                                     )
         (1988) Supp sec 316 - relied on.
       3. The Assessing Officer is directed to frame an as-
C sessment order in the case of the respondent assessee
  on the principle of law laid down by this Court in the case
  of *Tata Tea and followed by the Division Bench of the
  High Court in the impugned judgment, if not already made.
  [Paras 30, 31] [64-A-C]
D       CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDCTION : Civil Appeal Nos.                   ~
    8284-8285 of 2002
         From the Judgment & Order dated 22.9.2000 of the
    Calcutta High Court, Calcutta In FMA No. 232/1999
E                                 WITH
         Civil Appeal No. 8283 of 2002
         Parag P. Tripathi, ASG, Naveen Prakash, Shweta Garg,
    B.V. Balaram Das, H.K. Puri and Rajeev Sharma for the ap-
                                                                     ~
F   pearing Parties.
         The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
       DALVEER BHANDARI, J. 1. These appeals are directed
  against the judgment of the Division Bench of the High Court of
G Judicature at Calcutta delivered on 22nd September. 2000 in
  FMA No.232 of 1999.
        2. Brief facts which are necessary to dispose of these           ,,..
    appeals are recapitulated as under:
         3. The assessee Belgachi Tea Company filed a writ peti-
H
           UNION OF INDIA & ANR. v. BELGACHI TEA CO. LTD.           55
                  & ORS. [DALVEER BHANDARI, J.]
 'f    tion in the High Court of Judicature at Calcutta under Article     A
       226 of the Constitution. The main prayer of the writ petition is
       reproduced as under:
            "A writ in the nature of mandamus be issuea commanding
            the respondents to act according to law and to cancel
            and/or rescind and/or withdraw notices of demand dated B
            29.03.1984, 04.04.1984, 29.03.1985 and any proceeding
            taken or purported to have been taken under the Bengal
            Act, as amended by the Bengal Agricultural Income Tax
            (Amendment) Act, 1980 for the purpose of levy, imposition
            and collection of agricultural income tax in respect of c
            income derived from the said tea grown and manufactured
            by your petitioner and further forbearing the respondents
            from giving any effect or further effect of proceeding in any
            way to enforce the impugned notices of demand dated
            26.3.1984, 04.04.1984 and 29.03.1985."                        D
            4. The assessee also prayed that .:;ections 3 and 5 of the
       Bengal Agricultural Income Tax (Amendment) Act, 1980 be de-
       clared as ultra vires of the Constitution and beyond the compe-
       tence of the State Legislature in enacting the same.
                                                                         E
             5. The writ petition was disposed of by the learned Single
       Judge of the Calcutta High Court in terms of the judgment of
       this court in Tata Tea Ltd. & Another v State of West Bengal &
       Others 1988 (Supp) sec 316. In this case, the court directed
-.\·   that after assessment, th~ Income Tax Officer (for short "ITO") F
       can levy the tax on 40% of the income in accordance with the
       provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to
       as "the 1961 Act") and balance amount may be assessed by
       the Agricultural Income Tax Officer to tax under the Bengal Agri-
       cultural Income Tax Act, 1944 (hereinafter referred to as "the
                                                                         G
       1944 Act"). The court further directed that if any assessment
       order has already been passed contrary to the aforesaid direc-
'1
       tions, such order must stand quashed and a fresh assessment
       order should be passed in accordance with law.
            6. Being aggrieved by the said judgment of the learned        H
    56       SUPREME COURT REPORTS                  [2008] 8 S.C.R.


A Single Judge, the assessee company preferred FMA No.232
                                                                       ~
  of 1999 before the Division Bench of the High Court of Calcutta.
        7. The assessee is a public limited company carrying on
  the composite business of growing and manufacturing tea in
  the district of Darjeeling. The assessee company has tea gar-
B dens known as Belgachi Tea Estate, which consists of the gar-
  dens and a factory for manufacture of tea. The assessee com-
  pany sells the tea grown and manufactured in the said tea gar-
  dens. The factory in the said tea gardens is licensed under the      •
  Factories Act. The assessee company is also selling tea leaves
c produced in its tea gardens which is agricultural produce. The
  assessee is also involved in manufacturing of tea. The income
  from such business has been assessed all along under the pro-
  visions of the 1961 Act. The claim of the assessee company is
  that the entire income should be assessed under the provisions
D of the 1961 Act and after the income is assessed, the tax should
  be charged on 40% of such income under the 1961 Act and on
                                                                           ..i,
  the balance 60%, the State can tax under the 1944 Act. The
  assessee submitted that in view of the scheme of the 1961 Act
  read with rule 8 of the Income Tax Rules, 1962, the income de-
E rived from the sale of the tea grown and manufactured by a seller
  in India shall be computed under the provisions of the Act by the
  Income Tax Officer on the basis of aforementioned formula.
        8. Learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the
  sale proceeds of green tea leaves be treated incidental to busi-
F ness and its income should be computed under the provisions         ,.
  of the 1961 Act.
        9. Learned counsel appearing for the State submitted that
  the income from sale of green tea leaves is taxable as income
G from agriculture under the 1944 Act.
        10. The Division Bench in the impugned judgment placed
  reliance and followed the judgment of this court in Tata Tea (su-
  pra), in which the court considered how the income from 'tea
                                                                      ,.
  grown and manufactured' activities shall be taxed by the Centre
H and the State. After considering the provisions of both the 1944
           UNION OF INDIA & ANR. v. BELGACHI TEA CO. LTD.               57
                  & ORS.. [DALVEER BHANDARI, J.]

       Act and the 1961 Act, the court observed as under:-                    A

             "41 ......... the result would still be the same, namely, that
             the Kerala State Legislature can impose tax only in respect
             of 60 per cent of the income derived by an assessee who
             sells tea grown and manufactured by him in India and
             such income has to be computed in the manner laid down           B
             in the Act of 1922 and thereafter in the Act of 1961 for
~
             computation of business income. The same is the position
             in respect of the powers of the legislature of the State of
             West Bengal in spite of the amendments made by the
             said legislature by the Amendment Act of 1980 and earlier        c
             under the Amending Act of 1979 which was in force only
             for one year as we have stated before. It is not necessary
           · to strike down the said amendments because they do not
             directly conflict with the definition ofthe term "agricultural
             income" under the Constitution as we have pointed out            D
             earlier, but we may make it clear that they do not confer
             any wider power on the State Legislature to impose taxes
             on agricultural income than what we have set out earlier."

             11. This court considered the amendments made by the
       State Governments i.e. West Bengal and Kerala regarding tax
                                                                              E
       on the entire income. There is no dispute on the fact that from
       the income assessed, 60% is taxable by the State under the
       1944 Act and 40% is taxable by the Centre under the 1961 Act.
...,         12. The object behind taxing the 60% and 40% share of F
       the income assessed appears that there are common expenses
       on establishment and staff for two different activities that is tea
       grown and tea manufactured. There can be independent income
       from sale of green tea leaves and by sale of tea, that is, after
       processing of green tea leaves when green tea leaves become
                                                                           G
       tea for use. Income from agriculture is taxable by the State and
..,.   sale of tea after manufacturing is taxable by the Union of India
       as business income. To segregate income and expenses from
       two combined activities of assessee is not possible, but at the
       same time there cannot be two assessments of income by two
                                                                           H
    58       SUPREME COURT REPORTS                  [2008) 8 S.C.R.


A different authorities. Therefore, there can be only one assess-
  ment of income from the tea business. In order to properly com-
  prehend the legislative intention, a combined reading of relevant
  provisions of both the Acts i.e. the 1961 Act and the 1944 Act
  and the Rules framed thereunder is necessary. The relevant pro-
B vision is rule 8 of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 which reads as
  under:
         "8.(1) Income derived from the sale of tea grown and
         manufactured by the seller in India shall be computed as
         if it were income derived from business, and forty per cent
c        of such income shall be deemed to be income liable to
         tax.
         (2) In computing such income an allowance shall be made
         in respect of the cost of planting bushes in replacement of
         bushes that have died or become permanently useless in
D
         an area already planted, if such area has not previously
         been abar;doned and for the purpose of determining such
         cost, no deduction shall be made in respect of amount of
         any subsidy which under the provisions of clause (30) of
         section 10 is not includible."
E
         The similar provision in the 1944 Act is sub-section (1 A)
    of section 8, which reads as under:-
         "(1A) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, in
         the case of tea grown in West Bengal and sold by the
F        grower himself or his agent after manufacture, the
         agricultural income derived therefrom shall, as long as the
         purpose of assessment of income tax under the enactment
         relating to Indian Income Tax, the income derived therefrom
         is computed under those enactment in such manner as to
G        include agricultural income, be deemed to be that portion
         of such income as so computed on which income tax is
         not payable under those enactments, and agricultural
         income tax at the rates specified in the Schedule shall be
         payable on the whole of such agricultural income as so
H        computed."
    UNION OF INDIA & ANR. v. BELGACHI TEA CO. LTD.              59
           & ORS. [DALVEER BHANDARI, J.]

      13. The aforesaid sub-section (1A) which has been in-           A
serted with retrospective effect also provides that income from
'tea grown and manufactured' shall be assessed under the pro-
visions of Income Tax Act and the income assessed also in-
cludes agricultural income which is taxable by the State.
      14. Sub-section (3) of section 8 of the 1944 Act further        B
provides that for the purpose of assessment of agricultural in-
come tax a certified copy of an order of the assessment made
under the Income Tax Act shall be conclusive evidence of the
contents of such order. The relevant sub-section (3) of section
8 of the 1944 Act reads as under:-                                    C
     "(3) For the purpose of the assessment of agricultural
     income-tax under this section or any rule made thereunder
     a certified copy of an order of an assessment under the
     Indian Income-Tax Act, 1922, or a certified copy of an
                        .                                             D
     order of any appellate or revising authority or of the High
     Court or of the Supreme Court altering or amending such
     order of assessment under the provisions of that Act shall
     be conclusive evidence of the contents of such order."
      15. For the purpose of tax on agricultural income, the Ag- E
ricultural Income Tax Officer will go by the assessment order
made under the provisions of the 1961 Act and the contents of
the assessment for the year made by the Assessing Officer
under the 1961 Act shall be conclusive evidence 5f the contents
of such order and he has to go by the assessment and tax only F
60% income made under the assessment for the purpose of
the 1944 Act. If there is any apparent mistake in the order of the
ITO, he can bring it to the notice of ITO and that can be re~tified
by the ITO but no separate assessment of the income from 'tea
grown and manufactured' business can be made by the Agri-. G
cultural Income Tax Officer under the 1944 Act. He cannot once
again assess for that business income under the 1944 Act.
      16. The combined reading of rule 8 of the Income Tax
Rules, 1962 and section 8 of the 1944 Act and its amendment
by insertion of sub-section (1 A) in sectidn 8 of the 1944 Act left   H
     60        SUPREME_COURT REPORTS                      [2008] 8 S.C.R.


A  no doubt that the income from 'tea grown and manufactured'
   business, the income shall be computed in accordance with
  ·provisions of the 1961 Act by the Assessing Officer under the
   1961 Act and 40% of the income is taxable under the 1961 Act
   and 60% income is taxable under the 1944 Act by the State
B treating it as income from agriculture.

            17. According to the assessee, agricultural income de-
      rived from the sale of green tea leaves is incidental income from
    . the business of the assessee and cannot be taxed separately
      by the 1944 Act.
c
          18. There is no dispute that agncu11u ...... :... come of the as-
     sessee is taxable under the 1944 Act. The agricultural income
     has been defined in clause (1) of section 2 of the 1944Act. The
     said definition reads as under:
D          "2(1) "agricultural income" means)
           (a) any rent or revenue derived from land which is used for
           agricultural purpose, and is either assessed to land
           revenue in a State or subject to a local rate assessed and
           collected by officers of the Government as such;
E
           (b) any income derived from such land by-
                (i)     2 _ "; ,, !t·Jre or

                (ii)    the pertormance 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
                (iii)   the sale by a cultivator receiver of rent-in-kind
G                       of the produce raised or received by him, in
                        respect of which no process has been
                        performed other than a process of the nature
                        described in item (ii)

          (c) any income derived from any building owned and
H
                                          ---~
         UNION OF INDIA & ANR. v. BELGACHI TEA CO. LTD.             61
                & ORS. [DALVEER BHANDARI, J.]

          occupied by the receiver of he rent or revenue of any such A
          land, or occupied by the cultivator, or the receiver of rent-
          in-kind of any land with respect to which, or the produce
          of which, any operation mentioned in items (ii) and (iii) of
          sub-clause (b) is carried on;
          Provided that the building is on or in the immediate vicinity B
          of the land, and is a building which the receiver of the rent
          or revenue or the cultivator or the receiver of the rent-in-
          kind by reason of his connection with the land, requires as
          a dwelling house, or as a store house or other out building."
                                                                          c
         The definition of the 1944 Act makes it clear that the in-
     come from sale of green tea leaves is an agricultural income.

           19. Now the question which arises for adjudication is
     whether the agricultural income be taxed under the 1961 Act? It
     is true that both rule 8 of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 and sec-      D
     tion 8 of the 1944 Act provide how the mixed income from the
     growing tea leaves and tea manufacturing can be taxed. Mixed
     income means the income derived by an assessee from the
     combined activities i.e. growing of tea leaves and manufactur-
     ing of tea. Therefore, for the purpose of computation of income      E
     under the 1961 Act, it should be the mixed income from 'tea
     grown and manufactured' by the assessee.
           20. If the income is by sale of green tea leaves by the as-
     sessee it cannot be called income assessable under the 1961
     Act for the purpose of 40:60 share between the Centre and the        F
     State. In both the provisions i.e. rule 8 of the Income Tax Rules,
     1962 and section 8 of the 1944 Act, the word used is income
     derived from the sale of 'tea grown and manufactured'.
          21. The income from sale of green tea leaves is purely G
     income from the agricultural product. There is no question of
'f   taxing it as incidental income of the assessee when there is a
     specific provision and authority to tax that income i.e. the State,
     under the 1944 Act. In this view of the matter, the agricultural
     income cannot be taxed under 1961 Act.
                                                                         H
                              .,_ . _w_
     62        SUPREME COURT REPORTS                   [2008] 8 S.C.R.


A          22. It is also pertinent to mention that the Income Tax Of-
     ficer has assessed the income of tea manufactured by the as-
     sessee from 1977-78 to 1980-81 to the tune of Rs.1,44,250/-,
     Rs.4,28,040/-, Rs.54,450/- and Rs.92,351/- respectively and
     income of the assessee from the sale of green tea leaves was
B    more than Rs.10 lakhs in each accounting year (1977-78 and
     1978-79). In this view of the matter, the income of the asses-
     see from the sale of tea leaves can never be incidental to busi-
     ness.

          23. On careful an~lysis of this argument of the assessee,
c we find the same to be devoid of any merit. In a given case the
     assessee can process only 10% of green tea leaves and 90%
     of green tea leaves can be sold directly in the market. Can that
     income from sale of green tea leaves be treated incidental to
     the business? This can never be the intention of legislature.
[)
           24. In case the assessee directly sells the green tea leaves    ..
     resulting into an income from agricultural products, it c3nnot be
     taken as incidental income to the business and whatever the
     income is derived from the sale of the green tea leaves can be
     assessed by the Agricultural Income Tax Officer under the 1944
t    Act.
           25. The Division Bench of the High Court while following
     the ratio of Tata Tea (supra) directed the Assessing Officer to
     compute the tax on the income of the respondent assessee on
F    the basis of the aforementioned formula.
        26. The High Court further directed that in case the agri-
  cultural income had wrongly been included by the Income Tax
  Officer in computing the income under the provisions of 1961
  Act that could be excluded and assessment could be rectified.
G In the impugned judgment, it is also incorporated that by follow-
  ing these principles the Income Tax Officer would avoid the
                                                                          '(
  double taxation of the assessee.
          27. It is also directed that while taxing the income from the
     sale of green tea leaves, the Agricultural Income Tax Officer
H
        UNION OF INDIA & ANR. v. BELGACHI TEA CO. LTD.               63
               & ORS. [DALVEER BHANDARI, J.]

    should see, if expenses on the tea grown are already allowed           A
    to be deducted by the Income Tax Officer, there shall be no
    double deduction of the expenses, otherwise it would result in
    double deduction. The Division Bench, in the impugned judg-
    ment, after he_aring the parties, while relying on Tata Tea (su-
    pra), summed up the case in the following manner:                      B
              "(I)     The income from 'tea grown and manufactured'
                       shall be assessed by the Assessing Officer
                       under the 1961 Act.

               (II)    The income assessed 40% shall be taxed under        c
                       the 1961 Act and balance 60% shall be taxed
~                      under the 1944 Act by Agricultural Income Tax
                       Officer on the basis of income assessed by the
                       Assessing Officer under the 1961 Act.
               (Ill)   The income derived from sale of green tea           D
                       leaves is agricultural income and assessable
                       under the 1944 Act."
          28. In our view, the conclusion arrived at by the Division
    Bench of the High Court is in consonance with the judgment of          E
    this Court in Tata Tea (supra). This Court in Tata Tea (supra)
    held as follows:

•        "35. A reading of Article 245 of the Constitution with Entry
         82 of List I and Entry 46 of List II in the Seventh Schedule
         makes it clear that the State Legislature has exclusive           F
         jurisdiction to legislate in respect of taxes on agricultural
         income; and in respect of taxes on other income, it is
         Parliament alone which can legislate. The term
         "agricultural income" used in that entry has to be construed
         in accordance with the definition of the said term in Art.        G
         366(1) of the Constitution of India and that sub-article states
         that agricultural income means "agricultural income as
         defined for the purposes of the enactments relating to
         Indian Income-tax".
         29. We have heard the learned counsel for the c,.1r~ies at        H
    64        SUPREME COURT REPORTS                  [2008] 8 S.C.R.


A   length. We have also perused the provisions of the 1944 Act         ~
    and the 1961 Act. We uphold the view which has been taken by
    the Division Bench of the High Court in the impugned judgment.

        30. Before parting with this case, we deem it appropriate
  to direct the Assessing Olficer to frame an assessment order in
B the case of the respondent assessee on the principle of law
  laid down by this Court in the case of Tata Tea (supra) and
  followed by the Division Bench of the High Court in the impugned
  judgment, if not already made.

c         31. We further direct the Assessing Officer that in case
    the assessment order has already been passed contrary to the
    ratio of Tata Tea (supra), such assessment order must stand             .,.
    quashed and fresh assessment order be passed in accordance
    with law, as expeditiously as possible.
D        32. These appeals are disposed of in terms of the afore-
    mentioned directions. In the facts and circumstances of the case,
    the parties are directed to bear their own costs.
    D.G.                                     Appeals disposed of.