<?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>2017 (1) TMI 457 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=337377</link>
    <description>Receipt of seminar and allied activity fees did not alter the institution&#039;s essential charitable character, because it continued to promote awareness and disseminate information on the automobile industry. The proviso to Section 2(15) was held inapplicable since the receipts did not show that the assessee had ceased to exist for charitable purposes. On that basis, exemption under Section 11 was maintained and the Revenue&#039;s challenge failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 14 Dec 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 07 Jan 2017 10:17:28 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=454546" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (1) TMI 457 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=337377</link>
      <description>Receipt of seminar and allied activity fees did not alter the institution&#039;s essential charitable character, because it continued to promote awareness and disseminate information on the automobile industry. The proviso to Section 2(15) was held inapplicable since the receipts did not show that the assessee had ceased to exist for charitable purposes. On that basis, exemption under Section 11 was maintained and the Revenue&#039;s challenge failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 14 Dec 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=337377</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>