https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=181735 The court held that the quarry lease rent paid for excavating granite for ten years constituted capital expenditure. The appellant's claim that it was revenue expenditure was rejected. The court emphasized that the lease was not solely for the right to excavate granite blocks but involved the acquisition of an enduring asset. Citing relevant precedents, including Gotan Lime Syndicate v. CIT [1966] 59 ITR 718 and Aditya Minerals Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT [1999] 239 ITR 817, the court upheld the decision that the expenditure was capital in nature. The appeal was dismissed, affirming the ruling in favor of the Revenue. en-us Thu, 01 Apr 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 22 Apr 2016 18:04:30 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=181735 The court held that the quarry lease rent paid for excavating granite for ten years constituted capital expenditure. The appellant's claim that it was revenue expenditure was rejected. The court emphasized that the lease was not solely for the right to excavate granite blocks but involved the acquisition of an enduring asset. Citing relevant precedents, including Gotan Lime Syndicate v. CIT [1966] 59 ITR 718 and Aditya Minerals Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT [1999] 239 ITR 817, the court upheld the decision that the expenditure was capital in nature. The appeal was dismissed, affirming the ruling in favor of the Revenue. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 01 Apr 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=181735