https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169787 Expenditure on purchase, erection and fitting of a new boiler to replace a worn-out boiler in a sugar factory was treated as revenue expenditure, not capital outlay. Applying the principle that replacement of a subsidiary part of machinery which merely restores the plant to its original working condition does not create a new asset or enduring advantage, the court held the cost was allowable as current repairs or under the revenue deduction provision. The majority view treated the boiler as part of the machinery unit used in manufacture, so substitution of an equivalent boiler did not alter the fixed capital structure. en-us Sun, 27 May 1951 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 05 May 2015 10:27:49 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169787 Expenditure on purchase, erection and fitting of a new boiler to replace a worn-out boiler in a sugar factory was treated as revenue expenditure, not capital outlay. Applying the principle that replacement of a subsidiary part of machinery which merely restores the plant to its original working condition does not create a new asset or enduring advantage, the court held the cost was allowable as current repairs or under the revenue deduction provision. The majority view treated the boiler as part of the machinery unit used in manufacture, so substitution of an equivalent boiler did not alter the fixed capital structure. Case-Laws Income Tax Sun, 27 May 1951 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169787