https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=28026 The court ruled in favor of the assessee on both issues. Firstly, the deduction for additions and alterations to the leased shed was allowed as revenue expenditure since it was for repairs and necessary additions, not resulting in the acquisition of a capital asset. Secondly, the assessment of capital gains was also in favor of the assessee, as the surrender of tenancy rights for an ownership flat did not attract capital gains tax. The assessee was awarded costs for the reference. en-us Wed, 14 Jul 1982 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 17 Feb 2010 14:03:32 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=28026 The court ruled in favor of the assessee on both issues. Firstly, the deduction for additions and alterations to the leased shed was allowed as revenue expenditure since it was for repairs and necessary additions, not resulting in the acquisition of a capital asset. Secondly, the assessment of capital gains was also in favor of the assessee, as the surrender of tenancy rights for an ownership flat did not attract capital gains tax. The assessee was awarded costs for the reference. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 14 Jul 1982 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=28026