It is not a universally true proposition that what may be a capital receipt in the hands of the payee must necessarily be capital expenditure in relation to the payer. Therefore, the decision in CIT vs. Maheshwari Devi Jute Mills (1965) 57 ITR 36 (SC) wherein it was held that the sale of loom hours was in the nature of capital receipt and hence, not taxable, cannot be regarded as an authority for the proposition that payment made by an assessee for purchase of loom hours would be capital expenditure[Para 4]-Empire Jute Co. Ltd 124 ITR 1