https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=18738 The court ruled in favor of the Revenue, answering all three questions in the negative. It clarified that depreciation cannot be granted on the premium paid for leasehold land as it is not part of the cost of the superstructures, emphasizing adherence to the provisions of the Income-tax Act. The court's decision was supported by previous Supreme Court rulings in similar cases, ultimately upholding the Revenue's position on the issues raised. en-us Thu, 21 Dec 1995 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 31 Oct 2009 16:54:46 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=18738 The court ruled in favor of the Revenue, answering all three questions in the negative. It clarified that depreciation cannot be granted on the premium paid for leasehold land as it is not part of the cost of the superstructures, emphasizing adherence to the provisions of the Income-tax Act. The court's decision was supported by previous Supreme Court rulings in similar cases, ultimately upholding the Revenue's position on the issues raised. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 21 Dec 1995 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=18738