<?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>2018 (8) TMI 713 - ITAT CUTTACK</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=365241</link>
    <description>A university constituted under a special State enactment for educational objects was found to possess the requisite educational character for approval under section 10(23C)(vi), because its framework barred private or non-educational use of funds and the material did not show that it lacked genuine educational activity. On application of income, the Tribunal held that capital expenditure incurred for university development counts as application of income, and interest earned on endowment-related funds created and invested under the statutory framework was not unexplained diversion. The refusal of approval was therefore unsustainable and exemption approval had to be granted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 10 Aug 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 13 Aug 2018 06:12:07 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=530600" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (8) TMI 713 - ITAT CUTTACK</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=365241</link>
      <description>A university constituted under a special State enactment for educational objects was found to possess the requisite educational character for approval under section 10(23C)(vi), because its framework barred private or non-educational use of funds and the material did not show that it lacked genuine educational activity. On application of income, the Tribunal held that capital expenditure incurred for university development counts as application of income, and interest earned on endowment-related funds created and invested under the statutory framework was not unexplained diversion. The refusal of approval was therefore unsustainable and exemption approval had to be granted.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 10 Aug 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=365241</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>