<?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 (10) TMI 435 - ITAT HYDERABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=120867</link>
    <description>The Tribunal affirmed the assessee corporation&#039;s charitable institution status for assessment years 1983-84 to 1992-93, finding its objectives aligned with section 2(15) of the Income-tax Act. It ruled that the funds utilized for procuring essential commodities for distribution qualified as charitable purposes under section 11, thus no violation of section 11(2) occurred. However, the continuous holding of shares in a joint venture company beyond the prescribed period led to a breach of section 13(1)(d), disqualifying the assessee from exemption under section 11. Various disallowances and additions were upheld for different assessment years, with exemption denial under section 11 for violations of section 13(1)(d) in subsequent years.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 31 Oct 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 25 Jul 2012 10:38:37 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=157861" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (10) TMI 435 - ITAT HYDERABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=120867</link>
      <description>The Tribunal affirmed the assessee corporation&#039;s charitable institution status for assessment years 1983-84 to 1992-93, finding its objectives aligned with section 2(15) of the Income-tax Act. It ruled that the funds utilized for procuring essential commodities for distribution qualified as charitable purposes under section 11, thus no violation of section 11(2) occurred. However, the continuous holding of shares in a joint venture company beyond the prescribed period led to a breach of section 13(1)(d), disqualifying the assessee from exemption under section 11. Various disallowances and additions were upheld for different assessment years, with exemption denial under section 11 for violations of section 13(1)(d) in subsequent years.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 31 Oct 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=120867</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>