The main legal point established in the judgment is that Explanation 2 to S.5 of the Kerala Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1950 is intended to explain what expenditure is not deductible under S.50) and is not intended to explain the deductions in other clauses of S.5. Explanation (2) does not cover the entire field covered by S.5 (j).

Jagannadha Rao, C J.

These six Tax Revision Cases arise out of orders passed by the Agricultural Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, and raise common questions. They relate to three assessment years, 1975-76, 1976-77 and 1977-78. T.R.CNos.106 & 143 of 1991 relate to the assessment year 1975-76, T.R.C. Nos. Ill and 162 of 1991 relate to the assessment year 1976-77, and T.R.C. Nos. 129 and 133 of 1991 relate to the assessment year 1977-78. There was a remand order earlier by the Tribunal, and after remand the matter had again come up before the Tribunal, and that is the reason why two T.R.C s. have been filed for each year. While T.R.C.Nos. Ill, 133 and 143 of 1991, the first of the cases in each of the three years, relate to the original orders passed by the Tribunal at the time of remand, T.R.CNos.106, 162 and 129 of 1991 relate to the orders passed by the Tribunal in the appeals which came up before the Tribunal subsequent to the earlier remand orders. In the three years, the question arises in relation to Explanation 2 to S.5 of the Kerala Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1950 (the 'Kerala Act'). The assessee has claimed, in all the three years, that the rent paid by the assessee to its landlord in respect of the entire estate is to be allowed as a deduction under S.5(b) of the Kerala Act. But the Tribunal has not allowed deduction in so far as the portion of the rent attributable to the extent of land covered by immature plants. This was on the basis that Explanation 2 introduced in 1961 below S.5 is applicable to S.5(b) also, under which deduction is claimed. The other question relates to the deduction towards interest which is claimed as a deduction under S.5(e) or (h) or (i) alternatively. The interest claimed as a deduction is on the loan obtained and utilized by the assessee for the purpose of cultivation, etc., in respect of the entire estate, that is to say, the mature and immature oil palm. The Tribunal has not clearly stated whether the claim of the assessee would come under one or the other of the clauses, viz., S.5(e), or (h) or (i). It has, however, held that Explanation 2 is also attracted to the above said deduction, and the interest paid to the creditors by the assessee is disallowed in so far as the portion of the principal utilized for bringing up the immature oil palm. This method was adopted on the basis that Explanation 2 was attracted to the above said claim. It may also be noted that non-deduction of the rent in part is the subject matter of the appeals in all the three years, while the non-deduction of the interest charges in part, as stated above, relate to the two assessment years, 1975-76 and 1976-77.

2. We have already stated that the claim for deduction of the entire interest is for all the three assessment years, and the claim is under S.5(b) of the Kerala Act. So far as the deduction of interest is concerned, the claim of the assessee was under S.5(e), or alternatively under S.5(h) or 5(i). But the Tribunal has not given any clear-cut findings in so far as the claim for deduction of interest in respect of the assessment years 1975-76 and 1976-77 is concerned. We are, therefore, deciding the main legal question, namely, as to whether Explanation 2 to S.5 governs all the clauses of S.5 or whether it is to be restricted to S.50) alone. A question also incidentally arises as 10 whether Explanation 2 covers only a part of the expenses under S.50) or whether it covers the entire expenses covered by S.50). We shall decide the legal questions, and will leave it to the Tribunal to dispose of all the appeals once again on the basis of the principles of law laid down by us.

3. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioners, Shri. Markose Vellapally, that Explanation 2 to S.5 of the Kerala Act 9/1961 was inserted with a view to get over the decision of the Supreme Court in Travancore Rubber & Tea Co. v. Commissioner of Agricultural Income-tax, 1961 KLT 31= (1961) 41ITR 751 (SC), that the decision o