<?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>2003 (2) TMI 15 - KERALA High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=11395</link>
    <description>The dominant issue was whether processing charges received for processing third-party raw cashew nuts formed part of &quot;total turnover&quot; for computing deduction under s. 80HHC. The HC held that &quot;total turnover&quot; in Expln. (ba) is confined to consideration for purchase/sale of goods or amounts incidental to their transfer by the assessee; service receipts unconnected with any transfer of goods by the assessee cannot be treated as turnover, and inclusion would artificially inflate total turnover and dilute the deduction. The HC further held that s. 28(iiia)-(iiic) does not warrant a different conclusion. Processing charges were therefore excluded from total turnover; questions were answered in favour of the assessee and the assessment was directed to be modified accordingly.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 13 Feb 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 02 Jan 2026 13:10:21 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=50411" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (2) TMI 15 - KERALA High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=11395</link>
      <description>The dominant issue was whether processing charges received for processing third-party raw cashew nuts formed part of &quot;total turnover&quot; for computing deduction under s. 80HHC. The HC held that &quot;total turnover&quot; in Expln. (ba) is confined to consideration for purchase/sale of goods or amounts incidental to their transfer by the assessee; service receipts unconnected with any transfer of goods by the assessee cannot be treated as turnover, and inclusion would artificially inflate total turnover and dilute the deduction. The HC further held that s. 28(iiia)-(iiic) does not warrant a different conclusion. Processing charges were therefore excluded from total turnover; questions were answered in favour of the assessee and the assessment was directed to be modified accordingly.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 13 Feb 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=11395</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>