https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292289 The tribunal allowed the appeals filed by the revenue and dismissed the cross objections filed by the assessee. The main issues revolved around the nature of expenditure for acquiring mining rights, with the tribunal ruling that the consideration paid for acquiring mining rights constituted capital expenditure. The tribunal also held that such expenditure cannot be allowed on a staggering basis. Additionally, the tribunal upheld the disallowance of the premium paid for a Keyman Policy as revenue expenditure, stating that the deduction was not permitted as the liability did not crystallize during the relevant assessment year. en-us Tue, 26 Dec 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 18 Dec 2020 02:50:37 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292289 The tribunal allowed the appeals filed by the revenue and dismissed the cross objections filed by the assessee. The main issues revolved around the nature of expenditure for acquiring mining rights, with the tribunal ruling that the consideration paid for acquiring mining rights constituted capital expenditure. The tribunal also held that such expenditure cannot be allowed on a staggering basis. Additionally, the tribunal upheld the disallowance of the premium paid for a Keyman Policy as revenue expenditure, stating that the deduction was not permitted as the liability did not crystallize during the relevant assessment year. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 26 Dec 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292289