https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=22856 HC held that the fee paid to the Registrar of Companies for increasing authorised share capital is not allowable as revenue expenditure and, therefore, cannot be claimed as a deduction in full in the year of incurrence. Relying on binding precedent, the Court characterized the expenditure as capital in nature. However, interpreting s.35D(2)(c)(iv) purposively, HC held that such expenditure is specifically eligible for amortisation as preliminary expenses. Accordingly, the assessee is entitled to deduction of the registration fee under s.35D, to be spread over ten years, and the Revenue's contention that it is not allowable under s.35D(2)(c)(iii) or (iv) was rejected. en-us Sat, 27 Oct 1990 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 05 Dec 2025 15:16:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=22856 HC held that the fee paid to the Registrar of Companies for increasing authorised share capital is not allowable as revenue expenditure and, therefore, cannot be claimed as a deduction in full in the year of incurrence. Relying on binding precedent, the Court characterized the expenditure as capital in nature. However, interpreting s.35D(2)(c)(iv) purposively, HC held that such expenditure is specifically eligible for amortisation as preliminary expenses. Accordingly, the assessee is entitled to deduction of the registration fee under s.35D, to be spread over ten years, and the Revenue's contention that it is not allowable under s.35D(2)(c)(iii) or (iv) was rejected. Case-Laws Income Tax Sat, 27 Oct 1990 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=22856