The Hon’ble Kerala HC in the case of Beacon Projects Private Limited held that a sum paid can be termed as interest only when the same is paid in respect of a pre-existing debt obligation and there existed a debtor-creditor relationship.
The Hon’ble Kerala HC in the case of Kerala Kamudi P. Ltd. held that the assessee is allowed to follow hybrid system of accounting for different nature of transactions provided the same is followed consistently and income can be deduced from such accounting.
High court held In the case of The Fertilizers and Chemicals Travancore Ltd. vs. DCIT & CCIT that the CCIT is empowered and authorized to waive interest under section 234C only if the assessee case falls any of the two cases mentioned in notification dated 26/6/2006 for the income tax authorities
High court held In the case of The CIT vs. M/s Kerala Kaumudi (P) Ltd that the fundamental basis on which the assessment was re-opened itself is untenable. We are fully agree with the contention of the Tribunal that in the absence of any justifiable vitiating circumstances
In the case of Shri Thomas George Muthoot vs The Commissioner of Income Tax High court has held that TDS if to be deducted by individual who required to get his accounts audited. A statutory provision
The Court relied on the agreement concluded between Assessee and M/s Lakeshore according to which M/s Lakeshore would run Gastroenterology, Gastrointestinal surgery, Urology, Nephrology and Anesthesiology departments of the assessee upon receipt of payments as per the agreement which was not the case of undertaking a contract work.
Not only that the details which were allegedly in the possession of the Assessing Officer and which is mentioned in the assessment order were not disclosed to the assessee, but also the Assessing Officer also has not disclosed any such details in the assessment order.
It is obvious that section 2(28A) is not attracted to every payment made and that the provision can be attracted only in cases where there is debtor-creditor relationship and that payments are made in discharge of a pre-existing obligation.
In the case of M/s.A.B.Agencies Vs. Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, it was held by Kerala High Court that a CHA cannot be absolved of his lapse of supervision and misconduct of his employees attracting Clause 19 of the Regulations warranting action against him under Regulation 20.
The High Court held that the assessee was bound to get its accounts audited under section 64 of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969, and the delay in audit by the auditor appointed under the Act was not attributable to the assessee.
