Religious purpose exclusion versus charitable purpose: non overriding religious objects do not attract Explanation 3, registration directed under sect...
Search-assessment proviso jurisdiction, time-barred valuation reports, and denial of cross-examination vitiate valuation-based and confession-based ad...
Proceeds of crime: provisional attachment confirmed; equivalent value attachment and acquisition date fair market value upheld, Covid exclusion preser...
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.
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.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.