https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=13155 The High Court of Madras determined that the contribution made by the assessee for building a new bridge should be classified as revenue expenditure rather than capital expenditure. The court relied on precedent to establish that the construction of certain facilities, like roads, that facilitate business operations do not result in the acquisition of assets and are not capital in nature. As the bridge was built by the Government and the assessee did not gain ownership rights over it, the payment was considered an outgo without adding to the assessee's assets' value. Therefore, the court upheld the Tribunal's decision, treating the amount as revenue expenditure for the assessment year 1991-92. en-us Thu, 30 Nov 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 26 May 2009 17:10:26 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=13155 The High Court of Madras determined that the contribution made by the assessee for building a new bridge should be classified as revenue expenditure rather than capital expenditure. The court relied on precedent to establish that the construction of certain facilities, like roads, that facilitate business operations do not result in the acquisition of assets and are not capital in nature. As the bridge was built by the Government and the assessee did not gain ownership rights over it, the payment was considered an outgo without adding to the assessee's assets' value. Therefore, the court upheld the Tribunal's decision, treating the amount as revenue expenditure for the assessment year 1991-92. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 30 Nov 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=13155