https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=64994 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, stating that the loan given to Mahila Hatt did not infringe provisions of section 13(1)(d) and section 11(5) of the Act as it was utilized for a specific purpose aligning with the society's objectives. The Tribunal directed the CIT (Appeals) to reconsider the computation of income discrepancy and address the issue of interest charged under section 139(8) and 217, remanding both matters for further adjudication. en-us Mon, 18 Nov 1996 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 11 Feb 2011 15:34:39 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=64994 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, stating that the loan given to Mahila Hatt did not infringe provisions of section 13(1)(d) and section 11(5) of the Act as it was utilized for a specific purpose aligning with the society's objectives. The Tribunal directed the CIT (Appeals) to reconsider the computation of income discrepancy and address the issue of interest charged under section 139(8) and 217, remanding both matters for further adjudication. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 18 Nov 1996 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=64994