<?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>1972 (2) TMI 14 - DELHI High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=8727</link>
    <description>Trust income finally set apart under the governing deed for charitable application in a determinate proportion was treated as exempt under section 4(3)(i) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, because immediate spending was not required where the income retained its charitable character. The remaining one-eighth share, being attributable to a known beneficiary with a fixed entitlement under the deed, did not fall within the first proviso to section 41(1), which applies only where beneficiaries or shares are indeterminate. The special maximum-rate assessment was therefore not attracted, and the identifiable private share was taxable only in the beneficiary&#039;s hands at the ordinary rate.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 23 Feb 1972 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 03 Jun 2009 11:37:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=47769" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1972 (2) TMI 14 - DELHI High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=8727</link>
      <description>Trust income finally set apart under the governing deed for charitable application in a determinate proportion was treated as exempt under section 4(3)(i) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, because immediate spending was not required where the income retained its charitable character. The remaining one-eighth share, being attributable to a known beneficiary with a fixed entitlement under the deed, did not fall within the first proviso to section 41(1), which applies only where beneficiaries or shares are indeterminate. The special maximum-rate assessment was therefore not attracted, and the identifiable private share was taxable only in the beneficiary&#039;s hands at the ordinary rate.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 23 Feb 1972 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=8727</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>