https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=24636 The Tribunal held that the contribution towards road construction was revenue expenditure, allowing the deduction. Depreciation on increased asset value due to exchange rate fluctuation was also permitted. Filing fee and development/commissioning expenses were classified as revenue expenditure. Relief u/s 80J was not restricted on a pro rata basis. Judge Rama Jois concurred with the decisions but expressed a differing view on the application of the "precedent sub silentio" principle. en-us Thu, 17 Mar 1988 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 21 Jan 2010 13:34:40 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=24636 The Tribunal held that the contribution towards road construction was revenue expenditure, allowing the deduction. Depreciation on increased asset value due to exchange rate fluctuation was also permitted. Filing fee and development/commissioning expenses were classified as revenue expenditure. Relief u/s 80J was not restricted on a pro rata basis. Judge Rama Jois concurred with the decisions but expressed a differing view on the application of the "precedent sub silentio" principle. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 17 Mar 1988 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=24636