https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=467863 A holding company's one-time settlement of loan liability under a corporate guarantee given for the working capital needs of its 100% subsidiary was treated as revenue expenditure. The Tribunal noted that the guarantee commission on earlier years had been assessed as business income, the subsidiary had been carved out of the assessee's division, and the payment was made to safeguard business interests under commercial expediency. As the outgo did not result in acquisition of a fixed asset or creation of a capital asset, it was held allowable as business expenditure and the disallowance was deleted. en-us Fri, 16 Mar 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 07 Apr 2026 17:28:56 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=467863 A holding company's one-time settlement of loan liability under a corporate guarantee given for the working capital needs of its 100% subsidiary was treated as revenue expenditure. The Tribunal noted that the guarantee commission on earlier years had been assessed as business income, the subsidiary had been carved out of the assessee's division, and the payment was made to safeguard business interests under commercial expediency. As the outgo did not result in acquisition of a fixed asset or creation of a capital asset, it was held allowable as business expenditure and the disallowance was deleted. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 16 Mar 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=467863