https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=16400 The Supreme Court affirmed the Tribunal's decision allowing the deduction of bank guarantee commission as revenue expenditure, in line with precedents. However, the High Court reversed the Tribunal's decision on the addition made by the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner, holding that the Commissioner retains the power to issue directions under section 144A(1) during assessments. The High Court ruled in favor of the Revenue, emphasizing that such directions are not prejudicial if they guide investigations, contrary to the Tribunal's view. The High Court's decision clarified the authority of the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner in issuing directions during assessments. en-us Sun, 13 Sep 1998 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 07 Sep 2009 15:17:38 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=16400 The Supreme Court affirmed the Tribunal's decision allowing the deduction of bank guarantee commission as revenue expenditure, in line with precedents. However, the High Court reversed the Tribunal's decision on the addition made by the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner, holding that the Commissioner retains the power to issue directions under section 144A(1) during assessments. The High Court ruled in favor of the Revenue, emphasizing that such directions are not prejudicial if they guide investigations, contrary to the Tribunal's view. The High Court's decision clarified the authority of the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner in issuing directions during assessments. Case-Laws Income Tax Sun, 13 Sep 1998 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=16400