<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1992 (7) TMI 2 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=5379</link>
    <description>Betterment charges paid under the Bombay Town Planning Act were treated as capital expenditure because they were referable to improvement in the value of the land and the creation of a capital advantage. The character of the outlay depended on its nature, not on whether payment was voluntary or compulsory. Although the town planning works may have incidentally improved business efficiency, the charges had no direct nexus with the day-to-day conduct of the business and were not incurred for revenue operations. They were therefore not allowable as a revenue deduction.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 21 Jul 1992 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 10 Dec 2025 20:53:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=44462" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1992 (7) TMI 2 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=5379</link>
      <description>Betterment charges paid under the Bombay Town Planning Act were treated as capital expenditure because they were referable to improvement in the value of the land and the creation of a capital advantage. The character of the outlay depended on its nature, not on whether payment was voluntary or compulsory. Although the town planning works may have incidentally improved business efficiency, the charges had no direct nexus with the day-to-day conduct of the business and were not incurred for revenue operations. They were therefore not allowable as a revenue deduction.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 21 Jul 1992 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=5379</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>