https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=273178 Payment made to extend forest-leasing rights and secure a continuing source of timber was held to be capital expenditure, not revenue expenditure. The assessee did not acquire timber already held as stock-in-trade; instead, it obtained the right to enter the forest, mark and fell trees, and convert them into sleepers over time. Because the additional royalty or back-royalty was paid in consideration of extending the leases and conferred an enduring business advantage, it was attributable to acquisition of a capital asset rather than day-to-day trading operations. The amount was therefore not allowable as a revenue deduction. en-us Fri, 14 Dec 1962 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 09 Jun 2018 12:35:56 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=273178 Payment made to extend forest-leasing rights and secure a continuing source of timber was held to be capital expenditure, not revenue expenditure. The assessee did not acquire timber already held as stock-in-trade; instead, it obtained the right to enter the forest, mark and fell trees, and convert them into sleepers over time. Because the additional royalty or back-royalty was paid in consideration of extending the leases and conferred an enduring business advantage, it was attributable to acquisition of a capital asset rather than day-to-day trading operations. The amount was therefore not allowable as a revenue deduction. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 14 Dec 1962 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=273178