https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=64202 The Tribunal ruled partially in favor of the assessee, determining that the repairs and architect fee constitute revenue expenditure, while the tea-stall construction amount is considered capital expenditure. The order by the ld. CIT under section 263 of the IT Act was upheld for the capital expenditure part but quashed for the repairs and architect fee, resulting in a partial success for the assessee in the appeals for both years. en-us Thu, 07 May 1987 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 05 Feb 2011 13:27:09 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=64202 The Tribunal ruled partially in favor of the assessee, determining that the repairs and architect fee constitute revenue expenditure, while the tea-stall construction amount is considered capital expenditure. The order by the ld. CIT under section 263 of the IT Act was upheld for the capital expenditure part but quashed for the repairs and architect fee, resulting in a partial success for the assessee in the appeals for both years. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 07 May 1987 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=64202