Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the assessee scheme, being a vested scheme of UTI Mutual Fund, was required to hold a separate SEBI registration for claiming exemption under section 10(23D) of the Income-tax Act, 1961.
Analysis: The scheme was originally launched under the Unit Trust of India Act, 1963, for offshore investment purposes and was later vested in UTI Mutual Fund under the Unit Trust of India (Transfer of Undertaking and Repeal) Act, 2002. The record showed that SEBI registration was granted to UTI Mutual Fund as a mutual fund and that the scheme formed part of the schemes vested in it. The statutory scheme of the mutual fund regulations treated schemes as constituent parts of the mutual fund, while the relevant approvals and vesting arrangements supported the assessee's claim that a separate registration for the individual scheme was unnecessary. The rejection of exemption on the ground that the scheme held a separate PAN and lacked an independent SEBI registration was not accepted.
Conclusion: The requirement of a separate SEBI registration for the individual scheme was not attracted, and the assessee was entitled to exemption under section 10(23D).
Ratio Decidendi: Where a scheme is statutorily vested in a SEBI-registered mutual fund and forms part of the mutual fund's approved schemes, exemption cannot be denied merely because the scheme does not hold a separate SEBI registration.