https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=208806 The High Court dismissed the revenue's appeals, affirming that the expenditure on the tennis court was revenue in nature and eligible for allowance under Section 37(1) of the Income Tax Act. The court agreed with the lower authorities that the expenditure served advertising purposes and was not of a preliminary nature, thus not falling under capital expenditure. The court highlighted that the ownership of the court rested with the State Administration, supporting the conclusion that the expenditure was revenue in nature. en-us Mon, 31 Jan 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 30 Jan 2012 10:27:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=208806 The High Court dismissed the revenue's appeals, affirming that the expenditure on the tennis court was revenue in nature and eligible for allowance under Section 37(1) of the Income Tax Act. The court agreed with the lower authorities that the expenditure served advertising purposes and was not of a preliminary nature, thus not falling under capital expenditure. The court highlighted that the ownership of the court rested with the State Administration, supporting the conclusion that the expenditure was revenue in nature. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 31 Jan 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=208806