9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved: The judgment involves issues related to the delay in filing appeals, disallowance of service charges, disallowance of payment of LIC Group Gratuity Scheme, chargeability of interest u/s.234D, charging of interest u/s.234B and 234C, disallowance of payment of employees provident fund, and the reopening of the case.
Delay in filing appeals: The assessee filed appeals in ITA Nos. 922 & 923/Coch/2008 after a delay of 886 days. The delay was condoned after considering the reasons provided by the assessee, and the appeals were admitted for hearing. Disallowance of service charges: The main issue in several appeals was the deletion of disallowance of service charges paid to the Government of Kerala. The assessee argued that these charges were for commercial expediency and hence deductible. The Commissioner contended that such charges were not allowable under section 37 of the I.T. Act, 1961. The Tribunal decided in favor of the assessee based on a precedent from the jurisdictional High Court. Payment of LIC Group Gratuity Scheme: The Tribunal upheld the CIT(Appeals) decision regarding the disallowance of payment of LIC Group Gratuity Scheme, as it was not related to the assessment year under appeal. Chargeability of interest u/s.234D: The Tribunal decided in favor of the assessee regarding the chargeability of interest u/s.234D, citing that the operation of section 234D is not retrospective and the impugned assessment year predated the amendment. Charging of interest u/s.234B and 234C: The Tribunal upheld the CIT(Appeals) order directing the Assessing Officer to pass a speaking order on charging interest u/s.234B and 234C, finding no reason to interfere at that stage. Disallowance of employees provident fund payment: The Tribunal allowed the claim of the assessee on the issue of payment of employees provident fund, citing various legal precedents supporting the deduction of such payments made before the due date of filing the return. Reopening of the case: The Tribunal rejected the assessee's argument against the reopening of the case, following a decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, and decided the issue in favor of the Revenue. Result: The appeals were disposed of with some being dismissed and others being partly allowed based on the specific issues and arguments presented in each case.
|
