<?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>2022 (8) TMI 19 - ITAT PUNE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=425780</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the decision that Deendayal Memorial Hospital (DMH) is a prohibited person under section 13(3)(b) and denied exemption under section 11 for the donation received. However, the denial of exemption was restricted to the specific amount of Rs.65,00,000/- received from DMH, following the precedent set by the High Court of Bombay. The appeal was partly allowed, limiting the denial of exemption to the amount received from the prohibited person.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 08 Jun 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 01 Aug 2022 09:33:04 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=686671" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (8) TMI 19 - ITAT PUNE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=425780</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the decision that Deendayal Memorial Hospital (DMH) is a prohibited person under section 13(3)(b) and denied exemption under section 11 for the donation received. However, the denial of exemption was restricted to the specific amount of Rs.65,00,000/- received from DMH, following the precedent set by the High Court of Bombay. The appeal was partly allowed, limiting the denial of exemption to the amount received from the prohibited person.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 08 Jun 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=425780</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>