https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=248213 The High Court upheld the Tribunal's decision that the assessee could not claim the written down value of construction as revenue expenditure under "current repairs". The Court emphasized the distinction between maintenance expenses and construction costs, stating that the former is deductible under "current repairs", while the latter does not qualify. The Tribunal rejected the applicability of a cited case law, concluding that holding over the property after the lease period did not entitle the assessee to claim the construction value as repairs. en-us Thu, 20 Mar 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 21 Feb 2015 16:49:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=248213 The High Court upheld the Tribunal's decision that the assessee could not claim the written down value of construction as revenue expenditure under "current repairs". The Court emphasized the distinction between maintenance expenses and construction costs, stating that the former is deductible under "current repairs", while the latter does not qualify. The Tribunal rejected the applicability of a cited case law, concluding that holding over the property after the lease period did not entitle the assessee to claim the construction value as repairs. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 20 Mar 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=248213