https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=25737 The court ruled that the premium paid by the assessee for the lease was a capital expenditure, securing a lasting right over the plot. Despite being paid in instalments, the nature of the payment remained capital. The clause allowing the lessor to resume possession did not change this. The Tribunal's decision to treat the premium as revenue expenditure was deemed incorrect. Consequently, the judgment favored the Department over the assessee, with no costs awarded. en-us Mon, 22 Jun 1987 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 30 Jan 2010 15:28:28 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=25737 The court ruled that the premium paid by the assessee for the lease was a capital expenditure, securing a lasting right over the plot. Despite being paid in instalments, the nature of the payment remained capital. The clause allowing the lessor to resume possession did not change this. The Tribunal's decision to treat the premium as revenue expenditure was deemed incorrect. Consequently, the judgment favored the Department over the assessee, with no costs awarded. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 22 Jun 1987 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=25737