https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=8052 A lump-sum paid to cancel a proposed long-term lease was treated as capital expenditure because it was made to extinguish an onerous obligation connected with an enduring lease arrangement, not as a recurring business outlay incurred in earning profits. The governing distinction is between revenue expenditure in the course of operations and expenditure that acquires, preserves, or releases the assessee from a capital or enduring liability. On that basis, the payment was held outside the deduction for expenditure laid out wholly and exclusively for business, and the question was answered against the assessee. en-us Mon, 23 Nov 1970 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 27 Mar 2009 17:24:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=8052 A lump-sum paid to cancel a proposed long-term lease was treated as capital expenditure because it was made to extinguish an onerous obligation connected with an enduring lease arrangement, not as a recurring business outlay incurred in earning profits. The governing distinction is between revenue expenditure in the course of operations and expenditure that acquires, preserves, or releases the assessee from a capital or enduring liability. On that basis, the payment was held outside the deduction for expenditure laid out wholly and exclusively for business, and the question was answered against the assessee. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 23 Nov 1970 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=8052