https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=193452 Payments made at the inception of a business to obtain a restrictive covenant against competing operations were capital expenditure, because they secured an enduring protective advantage for the lease period or a substantial part of it and strengthened the business structure rather than meeting trading expenses. The fact that the consideration was paid periodically did not change its character where the obligation was finally and irrevocably undertaken for a lasting business benefit. The payments were therefore not deductible as revenue expenditure under Section 10(2)(xv). en-us Thu, 07 Jun 1951 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 29 Jul 2017 17:54:42 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=193452 Payments made at the inception of a business to obtain a restrictive covenant against competing operations were capital expenditure, because they secured an enduring protective advantage for the lease period or a substantial part of it and strengthened the business structure rather than meeting trading expenses. The fact that the consideration was paid periodically did not change its character where the obligation was finally and irrevocably undertaken for a lasting business benefit. The payments were therefore not deductible as revenue expenditure under Section 10(2)(xv). Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 07 Jun 1951 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=193452