https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=250049 The High Court upheld the decision of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal that the afforestation charges claimed as deduction were for commercial expediency and not of a capital nature. The Court found no merit in the appeal, stating that the expenditure did not create any asset for the assessee and was not prejudicial to the revenue's interest. Therefore, the Court dismissed the appeal, affirming the Tribunal's conclusion that the expenditure was allowable as revenue expenditure under the Income Tax Act. en-us Mon, 06 Feb 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 02 Jun 2021 17:09:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=250049 The High Court upheld the decision of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal that the afforestation charges claimed as deduction were for commercial expediency and not of a capital nature. The Court found no merit in the appeal, stating that the expenditure did not create any asset for the assessee and was not prejudicial to the revenue's interest. Therefore, the Court dismissed the appeal, affirming the Tribunal's conclusion that the expenditure was allowable as revenue expenditure under the Income Tax Act. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 06 Feb 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=250049