https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=11433 Expenditure on replacing draw frames was treated as revenue expenditure because the replacement did not increase installed capacity, did not create any new asset of an enduring nature, and did not bring about any substantial improvement to the textile unit. On those facts, the cost was characterised as a replacement cost rather than capital outlay. The reference was answered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. en-us Wed, 26 Mar 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 08 Aug 2009 12:35:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=11433 Expenditure on replacing draw frames was treated as revenue expenditure because the replacement did not increase installed capacity, did not create any new asset of an enduring nature, and did not bring about any substantial improvement to the textile unit. On those facts, the cost was characterised as a replacement cost rather than capital outlay. The reference was answered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 26 Mar 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=11433