<?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>2005 (3) TMI 393 - ITAT DELHI-A</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=63253</link>
    <description>Statutory market boards and market committees were treated as charitable institutions because their dominant object was advancement of an object of general public utility by regulating agricultural markets and protecting agriculturists. Their statutory creation, fee collection and earlier local-authority character did not by themselves exclude charitable status, and their activities were found genuine. Delay in filing the registration application was condoned because it arose in the context of the amendment withdrawing exemption, and refusal on that ground was not justified. Non-filing of audited accounts with the application also did not warrant rejection where audited accounts were on record and statutory audit obligations existed. Registration under section 12AA was therefore sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 14 Mar 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 11 May 2024 13:46:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=101697" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (3) TMI 393 - ITAT DELHI-A</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=63253</link>
      <description>Statutory market boards and market committees were treated as charitable institutions because their dominant object was advancement of an object of general public utility by regulating agricultural markets and protecting agriculturists. Their statutory creation, fee collection and earlier local-authority character did not by themselves exclude charitable status, and their activities were found genuine. Delay in filing the registration application was condoned because it arose in the context of the amendment withdrawing exemption, and refusal on that ground was not justified. Non-filing of audited accounts with the application also did not warrant rejection where audited accounts were on record and statutory audit obligations existed. Registration under section 12AA was therefore sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 14 Mar 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=63253</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>