Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the expenditure incurred for laying water pipelines and providing municipal amenities under the agreement was capital expenditure or revenue expenditure allowable as a deduction under section 10(2)(xv) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922.
Analysis: The expenditure did not bring into existence any capital asset belonging to the assessee. The pipelines and allied installations came to vest in the municipality, and the only benefit obtained by the assessee was immunity from municipal rates, taxes and charges for a period of fifteen years. Applying the commercial test of enduring benefit, the decisive question was whether the advantage lay in the capital field or merely facilitated the carrying on of the business more profitably while leaving the fixed capital untouched. Since the outlay secured only a revenue advantage and did not alter the capital structure of the assessee, it was not capital expenditure.
Conclusion: The expenditure was revenue expenditure and was allowable as a deduction; the appeal was dismissed.
Ratio Decidendi: An expenditure which does not create or improve a capital asset of the assessee, but merely secures a trading advantage in the revenue field, is revenue expenditure notwithstanding that the advantage may endure for a period of years.