https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=66887 The Tribunal held that the repair expenses incurred on the seed handling plant should be treated as capital expenditure, not revenue expenditure. The expenses were for reconstruction, not mere repairs, as substantial damage required changes in design and capacity. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, denying depreciation on the amount spent. Additionally, the Tribunal ruled that the net profit for deduction under section 80HHC must consider both profits and losses from manufacturing and trading activities, rejecting the assessee's claim to exclude losses from export trading activities. en-us Wed, 27 Nov 1996 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 07 Mar 2011 18:57:12 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=66887 The Tribunal held that the repair expenses incurred on the seed handling plant should be treated as capital expenditure, not revenue expenditure. The expenses were for reconstruction, not mere repairs, as substantial damage required changes in design and capacity. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, denying depreciation on the amount spent. Additionally, the Tribunal ruled that the net profit for deduction under section 80HHC must consider both profits and losses from manufacturing and trading activities, rejecting the assessee's claim to exclude losses from export trading activities. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 27 Nov 1996 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=66887