<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2026 (7) TMI 778 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=794892</link>
    <description>Stamp duty and registration expenditure incurred for executing a lease deed may be treated as revenue expenditure where the taxpayer obtains only a right to occupy, use and commercially exploit leasehold premises, without acquiring ownership or an independent capital asset. Applying Section 32(1)(ii) and the alternative claim under Section 37 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the expenditure was characterised as connected with carrying on the business rather than acquiring an enduring ownership right. Because the liability crystallised in the financial year relevant to A.Y. 2011-12, the amount was allowable in full in that year. Amortisation over the lease term and subsequent depreciation claims on the same amount therefore did not apply.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 29 May 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 14 Jul 2026 08:26:29 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=911546" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (7) TMI 778 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=794892</link>
      <description>Stamp duty and registration expenditure incurred for executing a lease deed may be treated as revenue expenditure where the taxpayer obtains only a right to occupy, use and commercially exploit leasehold premises, without acquiring ownership or an independent capital asset. Applying Section 32(1)(ii) and the alternative claim under Section 37 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the expenditure was characterised as connected with carrying on the business rather than acquiring an enduring ownership right. Because the liability crystallised in the financial year relevant to A.Y. 2011-12, the amount was allowable in full in that year. Amortisation over the lease term and subsequent depreciation claims on the same amount therefore did not apply.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 29 May 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=794892</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>