<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2011 (3) TMI 1357 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=210365</link>
    <description>Export house premium was treated as eligible for exemption under the export incentive provision, following the Supreme Court ruling applied for earlier years, so the assessee&#039;s claim succeeded on that point. Interest levied under the penal interest provisions had to be reconsidered in light of the retrospective amendment, because the amendment was binding on statutory authorities and had not been applied when the assessment was completed; the matter was remanded for fresh consideration after hearing the assessee. Disallowance of proportionate interest on borrowed funds diverted for non-business purposes was also remanded, the issue being covered by binding Division Bench precedent and requiring reconsideration on the facts.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 31 Mar 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 17:54:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=183800" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (3) TMI 1357 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=210365</link>
      <description>Export house premium was treated as eligible for exemption under the export incentive provision, following the Supreme Court ruling applied for earlier years, so the assessee&#039;s claim succeeded on that point. Interest levied under the penal interest provisions had to be reconsidered in light of the retrospective amendment, because the amendment was binding on statutory authorities and had not been applied when the assessment was completed; the matter was remanded for fresh consideration after hearing the assessee. Disallowance of proportionate interest on borrowed funds diverted for non-business purposes was also remanded, the issue being covered by binding Division Bench precedent and requiring reconsideration on the facts.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 31 Mar 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=210365</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>