<?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>2007 (9) TMI 315 - ITAT JODHPUR</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=68668</link>
    <description>Payments irrevocably made to a statutory board for construction, repair and renovation were treated as application of income under section 11 because the assessee parted with control over the funds and the amounts were earmarked for specified charitable purposes. Actual spending by the board in the same year was not required, and exemption was not denied merely because part of the activity occurred outside the committee&#039;s local jurisdiction. The separate claim for depreciation on construction work and related expenditure was not allowed, as it had not been claimed in the return and was treated as not surviving for merits consideration.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 28 Sep 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 07 Aug 2012 18:45:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=107061" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (9) TMI 315 - ITAT JODHPUR</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=68668</link>
      <description>Payments irrevocably made to a statutory board for construction, repair and renovation were treated as application of income under section 11 because the assessee parted with control over the funds and the amounts were earmarked for specified charitable purposes. Actual spending by the board in the same year was not required, and exemption was not denied merely because part of the activity occurred outside the committee&#039;s local jurisdiction. The separate claim for depreciation on construction work and related expenditure was not allowed, as it had not been claimed in the return and was treated as not surviving for merits consideration.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 28 Sep 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=68668</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>