https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=5168 Article 289(1) exempted only the property or income of a State, and a body corporate with separate legal personality, its own funds, assets and liabilities, and capacity to sue and be sued did not qualify while it continued to exist independently. Because the entity's funds and liabilities would vest in the State Government only on dissolution, its income remained its own and was not income of the State. The amendment to section 10 of the Income-tax Act also removed the broader exemption under section 10(20A) and confined section 10(20) to enumerated local authorities, a category that did not include the appellant. The income-tax notice was therefore upheld as valid. en-us Wed, 03 May 2006 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 30 Nov 2017 12:56:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=5168 Article 289(1) exempted only the property or income of a State, and a body corporate with separate legal personality, its own funds, assets and liabilities, and capacity to sue and be sued did not qualify while it continued to exist independently. Because the entity's funds and liabilities would vest in the State Government only on dissolution, its income remained its own and was not income of the State. The amendment to section 10 of the Income-tax Act also removed the broader exemption under section 10(20A) and confined section 10(20) to enumerated local authorities, a category that did not include the appellant. The income-tax notice was therefore upheld as valid. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 03 May 2006 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=5168