https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=14416 The High Court of Madras dismissed the Revenue's petition seeking a reference from the Tribunal's order. The Tribunal's decision to allow the deduction of amounts spent on replacing worn-out ring frames under "Current repairs" was upheld, citing a previous court ruling that such expenditure is not capital in nature. The Revenue's argument that the replacement cost should be treated as capital expenditure was rejected. en-us Thu, 22 Jul 1999 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 15 Jul 2009 16:54:02 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=14416 The High Court of Madras dismissed the Revenue's petition seeking a reference from the Tribunal's order. The Tribunal's decision to allow the deduction of amounts spent on replacing worn-out ring frames under "Current repairs" was upheld, citing a previous court ruling that such expenditure is not capital in nature. The Revenue's argument that the replacement cost should be treated as capital expenditure was rejected. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 22 Jul 1999 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=14416