https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=27199 The High Court determined that the expenditure incurred by the assessee for demolition and reconstruction of the building was revenue expenditure, not capital. The Court held that the expenditure resulted in significant savings in rent, making it revenue in character. The Court rejected arguments that the expenditure represented advance rent or a premium for the lease, emphasizing that the construction cost did not equate to a premium on lease. The Court also found that the expenditure was in lieu of future revenue payments, relieving the assessee from higher rent charges. The expenditure was deemed deductible in computing the total income of the assessee. en-us Tue, 09 Mar 1982 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 11 Feb 2010 14:53:18 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=27199 The High Court determined that the expenditure incurred by the assessee for demolition and reconstruction of the building was revenue expenditure, not capital. The Court held that the expenditure resulted in significant savings in rent, making it revenue in character. The Court rejected arguments that the expenditure represented advance rent or a premium for the lease, emphasizing that the construction cost did not equate to a premium on lease. The Court also found that the expenditure was in lieu of future revenue payments, relieving the assessee from higher rent charges. The expenditure was deemed deductible in computing the total income of the assessee. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 09 Mar 1982 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=27199