<?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>1981 (1) TMI 26 - MADRAS High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=29485</link>
    <description>A trust carrying on a newspaper business remained entitled to exemption under section 11 where, after an earlier decree and supplementary deed, the surplus income was bound by legal obligation to be spent only on charitable objects; the business undertaking was treated as the means of earning income for those objects, not as defeating charitable character. Credit entries made in favour of an educational institution were also treated as application of income under section 11 where the institution knew of the credits and later withdrew amounts from the credited balance, showing a real transfer rather than retention of beneficial ownership by the assessee. The exemption was therefore not confined to the amount actually withdrawn during the year.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 29 Jan 1981 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 13 Mar 2010 12:31:09 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=68482" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1981 (1) TMI 26 - MADRAS High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=29485</link>
      <description>A trust carrying on a newspaper business remained entitled to exemption under section 11 where, after an earlier decree and supplementary deed, the surplus income was bound by legal obligation to be spent only on charitable objects; the business undertaking was treated as the means of earning income for those objects, not as defeating charitable character. Credit entries made in favour of an educational institution were also treated as application of income under section 11 where the institution knew of the credits and later withdrew amounts from the credited balance, showing a real transfer rather than retention of beneficial ownership by the assessee. The exemption was therefore not confined to the amount actually withdrawn during the year.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 29 Jan 1981 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=29485</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>