“Section 8(1)”
The decision most relied on for Section 8(1) is CIT v. Institute of Banking Personnel Selection (264 ITR 110), cited in 398 judgments on BharatTax.
Leading authorities on Section 8(1)
Depreciation is allowable on assets for which the cost has been fully allowed as an application of income under Section 11 in previous years, when computing the income of a charitable trust. Charitable trusts are also entitled to carry forward their deficit.
For income to be assessable under the head 'Income from House Property' as per Section 22 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, beneficial ownership or the right to enjoy the property is sufficient; legal ownership is not a mandatory prerequisite.
Income cannot be assessed on purely notional figures or mere suspicion; it must be based on actual evidence and supporting material demonstrating its accrual or receipt by the assessee. Assessments made without such evidence are bad-in-law.
The sale of 'canned software' in physical form is the sale of a copyrighted article and constitutes 'goods,' distinct from the underlying copyright. This case provides foundational principles for distinguishing copyrighted works from copyrighted articles and for what qualifies as 'production or manufacturing of goods or articles' under tax laws.
A statute or amendment can apply retrospectively even without an express provision, if such application is a necessary implication from the language used, especially for clarificatory amendments or those intended to cure an acknowledged evil for the community's benefit.
Exemption provisions under Chapter III, such as Section 10B(8), must be interpreted strictly, and any claim for such exemptions must be made in the return of income. The principles governing Chapter III (incomes not forming part of total income) differ from those for Chapter VIA (deductions in computing total income).
A live link of third-party information can form the basis for reopening an assessment under Section 148, provided it contains material facts necessary for assessment. The Assessing Officer must demonstrate a "reason to believe" that income has escaped assessment, which can be satisfied by such information even if it pertains to other assessees or relates to accommodation entries.
An employer is not statutorily obligated to collect evidence from employees regarding the actual utilization of amounts paid towards leave travel concession or conveyance allowance, unless specific requirements are mandated by law or a CBDT circular.