<?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 1016 - Karnataka High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=176231</link>
    <description>The case involved M/s National Education Society claiming exemption under section 10 (23C) (iiiab) based on a government grant constituting 36.42% of its total receipts. The Assessing Authority initially denied the exemption, but the first appellate authority and Tribunal granted it. The revenue appealed, arguing the grant was not substantial finance. The courts considered various precedents and funding sources, ultimately determining the 36.42% grant as substantial financial aid. Both appellate authorities upheld the exemption, finding no errors in their decisions. The revenue&#039;s appeal was rejected at the admission stage as no substantial legal question arose.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 08 Jul 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 17 Dec 2015 15:13:51 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=409437" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (7) TMI 1016 - Karnataka High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=176231</link>
      <description>The case involved M/s National Education Society claiming exemption under section 10 (23C) (iiiab) based on a government grant constituting 36.42% of its total receipts. The Assessing Authority initially denied the exemption, but the first appellate authority and Tribunal granted it. The revenue appealed, arguing the grant was not substantial finance. The courts considered various precedents and funding sources, ultimately determining the 36.42% grant as substantial financial aid. Both appellate authorities upheld the exemption, finding no errors in their decisions. The revenue&#039;s appeal was rejected at the admission stage as no substantial legal question arose.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 08 Jul 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=176231</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>