https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=378683 The High Court held that the expenditure on constructing a building on a leasehold premise was capital expenditure as per Explanation 1 to Section 32(1) of the Income-tax Act. The Court dismissed the assessee's claim that the expenditure should be treated as revenue due to lack of ownership of the premises. The Court emphasized the enduring benefits of the construction, rejecting arguments of repairs and the necessity for expense bifurcation. The Revenue's appeals were allowed, ruling in favor of the Revenue and against the assessee. en-us Mon, 15 Apr 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 05 Jun 2019 15:22:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=378683 The High Court held that the expenditure on constructing a building on a leasehold premise was capital expenditure as per Explanation 1 to Section 32(1) of the Income-tax Act. The Court dismissed the assessee's claim that the expenditure should be treated as revenue due to lack of ownership of the premises. The Court emphasized the enduring benefits of the construction, rejecting arguments of repairs and the necessity for expense bifurcation. The Revenue's appeals were allowed, ruling in favor of the Revenue and against the assessee. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 15 Apr 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=378683