Allowing the appeal of the assesseee the Court held that even if there are non-permanent members, non-life members, temporary or honorary members who are not entitled to vote or offer themselves as candidates for any elective office or to the membership of the council or have no right of disposal over the surplus in case of dissolution of the club, the assessee would not cease to be governed by the principles of mutuality. Once the assessee is governed by the principles of mutuality, its income would not be construed to be an income within the meaning of the Act and liable to be taxed. The Court also held that the doctrine of mutuality, based on common law principles, is premised on the theory that a person cannot make a profit from himself. The essence of the principle of mutuality lies in the commonality of the contributors and the participants who are also the beneficiaries. The contributors to the common fund must be entitled to participate in the surplus and the participators in the surplus are contributors to the common fund. The principle postulates that what is returned is contributed by a member. Any surplus in the common fund shall therefore, not constitute income but will only be an increase in the common fund meant to meet sudden eventualities.  (AY. 2001-02)