Before accepting the applicant’s evidence that the receipts at issue were capital transfers in the nature of family gifts from Vanuatu and did not constitute income under ordinary concepts, Logan J referred (at para. 77) with approval to Federal Commissioner of Taxation v Montgomery (1999) 198 CLR 639, which indicated that the “core” of the meaning of “income” as used in the former s 25(1) of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1936 (Cth) was to be found in a statement by Pitney J of the United States Supreme Court in Eisner v Macomber (1920) 252 US 189, including that:
The fundamental relation of ‘capital’ to ‘income’ has been much discussed by economists, the former being likened to the tree or the land, the latter to the fruit or the crop; the former depicted as a reservoir supplied from springs, the latter as the outlet stream, to be measured by its flow during a period of time.