<?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>2012 (7) TMI 159 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=214584</link>
    <description>Interest waiver under Section 220(2A) was justified where the tax demand arose from an old assessment year, was served long after the firm had dissolved, and the assessee showed immediate payment on demand together with cooperation in recovery. Those facts supported genuine hardship, default beyond the assessee&#039;s control, and full cooperation, satisfying all three statutory conditions for waiver. On that basis, rejection of the waiver application was not sustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 21 Jun 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 06 Jul 2012 14:34:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=187978" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (7) TMI 159 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=214584</link>
      <description>Interest waiver under Section 220(2A) was justified where the tax demand arose from an old assessment year, was served long after the firm had dissolved, and the assessee showed immediate payment on demand together with cooperation in recovery. Those facts supported genuine hardship, default beyond the assessee&#039;s control, and full cooperation, satisfying all three statutory conditions for waiver. On that basis, rejection of the waiver application was not sustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 21 Jun 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=214584</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>