1 itxa3687-10+1 sas IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.3687 OF 2010 AND INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.3688 OF 2010 The Commissioner of Income Tax-15, Mumbai ..Appellant. V/s. M/s. Navkar Agricultural Farm ..Respondent. Mr. Ravindra A. Lokhande for the appellant. Ms. Sanjukta Chowdhary i/b. PKP Legal Solutions for the respondent. CORAM : J.P. DEVADHAR AND K.K. TATED, JJ. DATED : 16TH AUGUST, 2011 P.C. :- 1. Whether the ITAT was justified in holding that the income received by the assessee from the agricultural produce is exempt under Section 10(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, is the question raised in these appeala. 2. The ITAT has allowed the claim of the assessee by following its decision in the case of the same assessee for AY 2003-04. The contention of the revenue is that the appeal against the order of the ITAT 2 itxa3687-10+1 for AY 2003-04 was not filed by the revenue in view of the smallness of the tax effect. 3. Perusal of the order of the ITAT for AY 2003-04 shows that the assessee had purchased agricultural land along with plantation of 44,000 trees of safeta, 500 trees of lemon and 500 amrood tress for a total consideration of Rs.13,61,000/-. 4. The assessee subsequently sold those plantations and the income received from the said plantations was declared as agricultural income. The ITAT has held that the fact that the operation of planting the seeds was undertaken by the original owner would not preclude the assessee from claiming the income earned by the assessee on sale of plantations as agricultural income. The decision of the ITAT is based on finding of fact. No question of law arises out of the order of the Tribunal. Both the appeals are dismissed with no order as to costs. (K.K. TATED, J.) (J.P. DEVADHAR, J.)