<?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>1996 (3) TMI 42 - MADHYA PRADESH High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=17852</link>
    <description>A new objection to exemption under section 11 based on alleged contravention of rule 17 was not entertained because it had not been raised before the assessing authorities or the Tribunal, and reference jurisdiction could not be used to introduce it for the first time; the assessee therefore retained exemption on that ground. The trust&#039;s activities were held to be charitable, directed to the welfare of affected families and the poor and destitute, with no intention to carry on business, so the conditions for denying exemption under section 13(1)(bb) were absent. Both issues were answered in favour of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 22 Mar 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 25 Sep 2009 12:13:02 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=56852" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1996 (3) TMI 42 - MADHYA PRADESH High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=17852</link>
      <description>A new objection to exemption under section 11 based on alleged contravention of rule 17 was not entertained because it had not been raised before the assessing authorities or the Tribunal, and reference jurisdiction could not be used to introduce it for the first time; the assessee therefore retained exemption on that ground. The trust&#039;s activities were held to be charitable, directed to the welfare of affected families and the poor and destitute, with no intention to carry on business, so the conditions for denying exemption under section 13(1)(bb) were absent. Both issues were answered in favour of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 22 Mar 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=17852</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>