<?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>2010 (7) TMI 159 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=77719</link>
    <description>HC held that an interest-free loan of Rs. 90,50,000 advanced by the assessee-society to another society did not contravene s.13(1)(d) read with s.11(5) of the Act and therefore did not disentitle the assessee to s.11 benefits. The loan was treated neither as an investment nor as a deposit, both societies shared similar objects, were registered under s.12A and had s.80G approvals, and the loan being interest-free and subsequently repaid supported the conclusion.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 28 Jul 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 28 Aug 2025 13:27:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=115880" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (7) TMI 159 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=77719</link>
      <description>HC held that an interest-free loan of Rs. 90,50,000 advanced by the assessee-society to another society did not contravene s.13(1)(d) read with s.11(5) of the Act and therefore did not disentitle the assessee to s.11 benefits. The loan was treated neither as an investment nor as a deposit, both societies shared similar objects, were registered under s.12A and had s.80G approvals, and the loan being interest-free and subsequently repaid supported the conclusion.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 28 Jul 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=77719</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>