1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule — now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available
2. New: “In Favour Of” filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws →
TaxTMI Login
🚀 New: Section-Wise Filter ✕
Just a moment...
1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule — now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available
2. New: “In Favour Of” filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
<h1>Court rules expenditure on feasibility report for soda ash plant not deductible as business expense</h1> The High Court of Gujarat ruled that the expenditure incurred for obtaining a techno-economic feasibility report and consultation for a soda ash plant was ... Search And Seizure, Seizure Issues involved: Whether the expenditure incurred for obtaining a techno-economic feasibility report and consultation for a soda ash plant can be considered as revenue expenditure or capital expenditure.Summary:The High Court of Gujarat considered the case of a public limited company for the assessment year 1973-74, where the company claimed deduction of amounts paid for obtaining a techno-economic feasibility report and consultation fees as revenue expenditure. The Income-tax Officer and the Appellate Assistant Commissioner considered the expenditure as capital expenditure for expanding the business. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal upheld this view, stating that the establishment of a new unit, even if part of the existing business, would constitute capital expenditure. The Court was tasked with determining whether the Tribunal's decision was correct in law.To be allowed as business expenditure u/s 37 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the expenditure must be revenue in nature, laid out exclusively for business purposes, and not covered by specific sections of the Act. The Tribunal found that the company's expenditure was for acquiring a new asset, making it capital in nature. The Court agreed with this finding, stating that once an expenditure is for acquiring a capital asset, it cannot be deducted u/s 37. Citing relevant case law, the Court held that the expenditure in question was rightly disallowed as capital expenditure, affirming the Tribunal's decision.In conclusion, the Court answered the question referred to them in the affirmative, stating that the expenditure for obtaining the techno-economic feasibility report and consultation for the soda ash plant was rightly disallowed as capital expenditure. The reference was answered accordingly, with no order as to costs.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
