https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=75651 The court ruled in favor of the appellant/assessee, allowing the deduction of roll over charges under section 36(1)(iii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The court held that the roll over charges were for business purposes related to borrowed capital, qualifying as revenue expenditure. The Tribunal's decision was reversed, emphasizing that such charges are akin to interest or commitment charges and are allowable under section 36(1)(iii). The court found support in various Supreme Court decisions, concluding that the roll over charges should be treated as revenue expenditure, not capital expenditure. en-us Mon, 21 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 03 May 2010 00:00:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=75651 The court ruled in favor of the appellant/assessee, allowing the deduction of roll over charges under section 36(1)(iii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The court held that the roll over charges were for business purposes related to borrowed capital, qualifying as revenue expenditure. The Tribunal's decision was reversed, emphasizing that such charges are akin to interest or commitment charges and are allowable under section 36(1)(iii). The court found support in various Supreme Court decisions, concluding that the roll over charges should be treated as revenue expenditure, not capital expenditure. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 21 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=75651