AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
3 paragraphs · 82 words
1.
It seems to us clear with reference to the definitions in Section 3, Madras Act 4 of 1938 that a firm of money lenders cannot be an agriculturist.
If the application be treated as one by the individual member of the firm it must fail, for the individual member has been assessed to Income Tax
during the period specified in proviso C to Section 3(2), so that he cannot claim to be an agriculturist. The appeal is therefore dismissed with costs.