https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=26485 The court ruled in favor of the Revenue, determining that the royalty payment made by the assessee company was of a capital nature and not deductible as revenue expenditure. However, the assessee was allowed depreciation and development rebate on the capital expenditure. The court highlighted the distinction between capital and revenue expenditure, emphasizing that expenses for acquiring assets or advantages for the enduring benefit of the business are capital in nature. The judgment was delivered by Judge P. C. Balakrishna Menon, with specific questions answered in favor of both parties. en-us Thu, 06 Mar 1986 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 05 Feb 2010 13:19:28 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=26485 The court ruled in favor of the Revenue, determining that the royalty payment made by the assessee company was of a capital nature and not deductible as revenue expenditure. However, the assessee was allowed depreciation and development rebate on the capital expenditure. The court highlighted the distinction between capital and revenue expenditure, emphasizing that expenses for acquiring assets or advantages for the enduring benefit of the business are capital in nature. The judgment was delivered by Judge P. C. Balakrishna Menon, with specific questions answered in favor of both parties. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 06 Mar 1986 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=26485