https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=399448 The court held in favor of the Revenue, concluding that the expenses incurred by the assessee on lease premises for construction, renovation, and improvement should be treated as capital expenditure under Explanation 1 to Section 32(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The court rejected arguments for treating the expenses as revenue expenditure, emphasizing the enduring nature and capital implications of the expenditures. The appeals filed by the Revenue were allowed, and the tax case appeals were decided in favor of the Revenue, with no costs awarded. en-us Mon, 05 Oct 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 10 Oct 2020 16:08:01 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=399448 The court held in favor of the Revenue, concluding that the expenses incurred by the assessee on lease premises for construction, renovation, and improvement should be treated as capital expenditure under Explanation 1 to Section 32(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The court rejected arguments for treating the expenses as revenue expenditure, emphasizing the enduring nature and capital implications of the expenditures. The appeals filed by the Revenue were allowed, and the tax case appeals were decided in favor of the Revenue, with no costs awarded. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 05 Oct 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=399448