https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=151671 The Tribunal allowed the Revenue's appeal, upholding the Assessing Officer's disallowance of Rs. 10 lakhs claimed by the assessee-firm as compensation for vacating premises. The Tribunal determined that the payment, whether for peaceful possession or renovation costs, constituted capital expenditure and was not deductible as revenue expenditure under Explanation 1 to section 32. Familial relationships and lack of evidence for dispute over possession were considered, leading to the conclusion that the payment did not qualify for deduction. en-us Tue, 30 Sep 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 17 Aug 2016 15:18:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=151671 The Tribunal allowed the Revenue's appeal, upholding the Assessing Officer's disallowance of Rs. 10 lakhs claimed by the assessee-firm as compensation for vacating premises. The Tribunal determined that the payment, whether for peaceful possession or renovation costs, constituted capital expenditure and was not deductible as revenue expenditure under Explanation 1 to section 32. Familial relationships and lack of evidence for dispute over possession were considered, leading to the conclusion that the payment did not qualify for deduction. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 30 Sep 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=151671