https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=37729 The court ruled that the fee paid for increasing authorized capital was not deductible as revenue expenditure under s. 37 of the I.T. Act, 1961, as it provided an enduring advantage, making it capital in nature. However, the tax paid under the Uttar Pradesh Act was allowed as revenue expenditure under the same section. The case was remanded to the Tribunal for further proceedings, with no order as to costs. en-us Tue, 06 Mar 1979 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 31 Mar 2010 16:57:55 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=37729 The court ruled that the fee paid for increasing authorized capital was not deductible as revenue expenditure under s. 37 of the I.T. Act, 1961, as it provided an enduring advantage, making it capital in nature. However, the tax paid under the Uttar Pradesh Act was allowed as revenue expenditure under the same section. The case was remanded to the Tribunal for further proceedings, with no order as to costs. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 06 Mar 1979 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=37729