https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=235945 The High Court upheld the decisions of the lower authorities, affirming that the expenses incurred by the assessee in writing off assets were revenue costs necessary for obtaining a bank guarantee. The Court concluded that the expenses were incidental to the business and not capital costs, in line with precedents set by the Supreme Court. As there were no errors found in the decisions of the CIT(A) and ITAT, the tax appeal was dismissed, confirming the treatment of the expenses as revenue costs in the normal course of business operations. en-us Mon, 25 Mar 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 07 Aug 2013 15:25:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=235945 The High Court upheld the decisions of the lower authorities, affirming that the expenses incurred by the assessee in writing off assets were revenue costs necessary for obtaining a bank guarantee. The Court concluded that the expenses were incidental to the business and not capital costs, in line with precedents set by the Supreme Court. As there were no errors found in the decisions of the CIT(A) and ITAT, the tax appeal was dismissed, confirming the treatment of the expenses as revenue costs in the normal course of business operations. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 25 Mar 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=235945