https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=20380 The court held that the payment of Rs. 48,312 made by the assessee for technical documentation was revenue expenditure, not capital expenditure. The court found that the payment was for technical know-how transfer, not the acquisition of an enduring asset, thus qualifying as revenue expenditure. As a result, the assessee was not entitled to development rebate and depreciation on the amount. The court did not award costs in the case. en-us Thu, 15 Oct 1992 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 13 Nov 2009 15:55:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=20380 The court held that the payment of Rs. 48,312 made by the assessee for technical documentation was revenue expenditure, not capital expenditure. The court found that the payment was for technical know-how transfer, not the acquisition of an enduring asset, thus qualifying as revenue expenditure. As a result, the assessee was not entitled to development rebate and depreciation on the amount. The court did not award costs in the case. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 15 Oct 1992 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=20380