assessee is in appeal pertaining to asst. yr. 1979-80. first ground pertains to expenditure incurred on replacement of old cable lines in cinema house which ld CIT (A) and ITO have held to be capital expenditure. ld. CIT (A) has in very long and labored order held that it is capital expenditure because cable line from transformers to assessee's premises belonged to Rajasthan State Electricity Board and not to assessee. We have carefully read order of CIT (A) and have heard ld. counsel for assessee and Departmental Representative, but we find ourselves unable to subscribe to conclusions arrived at by authorities below. When assessee who is running cinema house has to draw electricity from transformer and cable bearing power gets worn out by wear and tear, expenditure on replacement is business expenditure pure and simple and not capital expenditure in any event. purpose of replacement is only to secure constant and uninterrupted power supply. fact that power line belongs to RSEB who obviously failed to replace it and assessee felt complied to do so at its own cost makes assessee's case ker. We, therefore, allow appeal and delete disallowance. Insofar as expenditure shall be allowed as Revenue expenditure, assessee will no be entitled to depreciation thereon. next ground pertains to disallowance of Rs. 6,678 out of expenses on complimentary passes. ITO allowed Rs. 5,000 out of Rs. 11,678 treating t h e expenditure as entertainment expenditure. In our opinion, even this conclusion which has been confirmed by CIT (A) is erroneous. expenditure on giving complimentary passes to certain authorities and also to distributors, etc., it not in order to entertain them or offer hospitality to them, but is pure business expenditure. We, therefore, allow this ground also and delete addition. appeal is allowed. *** MANIRAM & SONS v. INCOME TAX OFFICER