1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule β now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available


2. New: βIn Favour Ofβ filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws β
Just a moment...
1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule β now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available


2. New: βIn Favour Ofβ filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws β
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
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.
The primary issue is classification of expenditure on railway track, conveyor belt and ventilation ducting as revenue or capital. The tribunal applied the enduring-benefit test: if expenditure creates an enduring asset for the business's permanent profit-earning apparatus it is capital; if it facilitates current contract operations and yields only temporary utility it is revenue. Applying this test, the tribunal found the site-specific railway siding, conveyor system and ventilation ducting were temporary, removable or functionally limited to the contract and did not enhance core capacity; accordingly the expenditure was revenue in nature and the appellant's appeal was allowed.