https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=62408 Expenditure on constructing a cemented storage tank on leased premises was treated as revenue expenditure because the assessee, as tenant, did not acquire ownership of any structure erected under the lease and no capital asset came into existence in its hands. The analysis also noted that the lease was for a short duration, so the benefit of the tank was limited and did not justify capital treatment. On that reasoning, section 32(1A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 was not attracted, and the Revenue's appeal failed. en-us Fri, 29 May 1981 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 19 Jan 2011 17:22:22 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=62408 Expenditure on constructing a cemented storage tank on leased premises was treated as revenue expenditure because the assessee, as tenant, did not acquire ownership of any structure erected under the lease and no capital asset came into existence in its hands. The analysis also noted that the lease was for a short duration, so the benefit of the tank was limited and did not justify capital treatment. On that reasoning, section 32(1A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 was not attracted, and the Revenue's appeal failed. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 29 May 1981 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=62408