<?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>2016 (7) TMI 107 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329509</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee, restoring the exemption under Section 11. It held that the primary purpose of the assessee was charitable, and profitable incidental activities did not change its charitable nature. The Tribunal concluded that the assessee was not affected by the proviso to Section 2(15) and emphasized the principle of consistency in tax assessments.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 29 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 02 Jul 2016 17:38:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=433742" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (7) TMI 107 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329509</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee, restoring the exemption under Section 11. It held that the primary purpose of the assessee was charitable, and profitable incidental activities did not change its charitable nature. The Tribunal concluded that the assessee was not affected by the proviso to Section 2(15) and emphasized the principle of consistency in tax assessments.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 29 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329509</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>