Section 10(1) of the Income Tax Act

The Completed Contract Method (CCM) is an accepted method of accounting for recognizing revenue from real estate contracts, allowing income recognition to be deferred until the contract's completion. The Supreme Court approved the use of CCM, having considered both CCM and the Percentage of Completion Method (POCM) under the framework of Section 145.

Income is considered agricultural income, exempt under Section 10(1), only if the land undergoes a measure of cultivation involving basic primary operations prior to germination and subsequent post-germination activities requiring human skill and labour.

The principle of res judicata or estoppel does not strictly apply to Income Tax authorities, including the Tribunal. However, an earlier decision on the same question should not be reopened if it was arrived at after due inquiry, was not arbitrary or perverse, and no fresh facts are presented.

A business loss arising from employee embezzlement or fraud is deemed to have occurred only when the employer becomes aware of it and realizes that the embezzled amounts cannot be recovered.

An assessment or addition to income cannot be made solely based on a retracted statement, especially when it is not corroborated by seized material or other concrete evidence. The revenue must produce evidence to establish claims like understatement of sale consideration or 'on-money'.

If the actual cost of an asset was wrongly assessed in earlier years, it can be recomputed and corrected in subsequent assessment years. Interest incurred before production on borrowed money for plant construction can be capitalized and added to the cost of fixed assets.

Agricultural income exemption is denied when no lease of land is created, as leasing might be prohibited under relevant land reform acts.

The 'written down value' (WDV) under Section 43(6)(b) is determined by depreciation that has been 'actually allowed', meaning it has been taken into account or granted and given effect to by the Income-tax Officer in computing taxable income.

Condonation of delay in filing appeals is not an exception and should not be an anticipated benefit for government departments. Departments must demonstrate reasonable and acceptable reasons for delay, with bona fide effort, and mere procedural red tape is insufficient grounds.

Income-tax assessments made to the best of the Assessing Officer's judgment must be legal and regular, not arbitrary, vague, or fanciful. The assessment must be based on reason and justice, following established legal principles rather than private opinion or whim.