https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=27080 The High Court, in a case concerning the relocation of a company's headquarters, determined that the expenses incurred in shifting the office from one location to another were capital in nature. The Court relied on the principle that expenditure resulting in enduring advantages is considered capital expenditure, as established in a Supreme Court decision. Despite the factory remaining in the original location, the enduring advantages derived from the office relocation justified categorizing the expenses as capital expenditure. The Court held that the expenses were not of a recurring nature and upheld the Department's position that the expenses were capital in nature, reversing the Tribunal's decision. en-us Wed, 24 Apr 1985 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 10 Feb 2010 15:57:09 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=27080 The High Court, in a case concerning the relocation of a company's headquarters, determined that the expenses incurred in shifting the office from one location to another were capital in nature. The Court relied on the principle that expenditure resulting in enduring advantages is considered capital expenditure, as established in a Supreme Court decision. Despite the factory remaining in the original location, the enduring advantages derived from the office relocation justified categorizing the expenses as capital expenditure. The Court held that the expenses were not of a recurring nature and upheld the Department's position that the expenses were capital in nature, reversing the Tribunal's decision. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 24 Apr 1985 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=27080