<?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>1999 (10) TMI 27 - ALLAHABAD High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=15099</link>
    <description>The High Court ruled against the assessee-company&#039;s claim for exemption under section 10(20A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, as it did not meet the criteria to be considered an authority as per the Act. The court denied the exemption claim related to income earned from interest on fixed deposits, stating that despite being registered under the Companies Act, the company did not fall under the specific categories outlined in section 10(20A) for housing accommodation, planning, or development purposes. Additionally, the court declined to address the deductibility of expenses against income from interest on fixed deposits and miscellaneous income due to the impracticality of conducting a fresh inquiry after a significant time lapse.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 01 Oct 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 03 Aug 2009 10:51:06 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=54099" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1999 (10) TMI 27 - ALLAHABAD High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=15099</link>
      <description>The High Court ruled against the assessee-company&#039;s claim for exemption under section 10(20A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, as it did not meet the criteria to be considered an authority as per the Act. The court denied the exemption claim related to income earned from interest on fixed deposits, stating that despite being registered under the Companies Act, the company did not fall under the specific categories outlined in section 10(20A) for housing accommodation, planning, or development purposes. Additionally, the court declined to address the deductibility of expenses against income from interest on fixed deposits and miscellaneous income due to the impracticality of conducting a fresh inquiry after a significant time lapse.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 01 Oct 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=15099</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>