https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=152317 The court held that the Chief Commissioner erred in equating the accumulation of surplus with profit, determining that the petitioner institution qualifies for exemption under section 10(23C)(vi) of the Income-tax Act, as it operates solely for educational purposes. The court set aside the previous decision and instructed the Chief Commissioner to reevaluate the matter within four months, emphasizing the distinction between surplus and profit in educational institutions. Specific financial transactions, like payments to Ganesh Rice Mill, should be scrutinized to ensure compliance with the law. en-us Tue, 16 Mar 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 14 Oct 2014 09:55:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=152317 The court held that the Chief Commissioner erred in equating the accumulation of surplus with profit, determining that the petitioner institution qualifies for exemption under section 10(23C)(vi) of the Income-tax Act, as it operates solely for educational purposes. The court set aside the previous decision and instructed the Chief Commissioner to reevaluate the matter within four months, emphasizing the distinction between surplus and profit in educational institutions. Specific financial transactions, like payments to Ganesh Rice Mill, should be scrutinized to ensure compliance with the law. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 16 Mar 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=152317