https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=190373 Stamp duty paid to obtain leasehold premises for a mill was held to be capital expenditure, because the outlay was made with a view to acquiring a capital asset or enduring advantage. The fact that the intended lease ultimately proved ineffective did not change the character of the expenditure, since success or failure of the venture does not determine whether the payment is capital or revenue in nature. The amount was therefore not allowable as a revenue deduction under section 10(2)(xv) of the Income-tax Act. en-us Thu, 11 Apr 1963 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 13 Feb 2017 17:34:32 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=190373 Stamp duty paid to obtain leasehold premises for a mill was held to be capital expenditure, because the outlay was made with a view to acquiring a capital asset or enduring advantage. The fact that the intended lease ultimately proved ineffective did not change the character of the expenditure, since success or failure of the venture does not determine whether the payment is capital or revenue in nature. The amount was therefore not allowable as a revenue deduction under section 10(2)(xv) of the Income-tax Act. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 11 Apr 1963 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=190373