<?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>1998 (8) TMI 86 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40221</link>
    <description>A wakf-alal-aulad recognised under Mohammedan law was held valid despite objections based on the rule against perpetuity, because section 2 of the Transfer of Property Act preserves the operation of Mohammedan law and sections 13 and 14 do not invalidate such a dedication. The permanent dedication of property for descendants and thereafter for a religious or charitable object was therefore effective, and the settlor ceased to own the property on creation of the wakf. As the settlor had divested title and retained no interest at death, the corpus of the valid wakf was not property passing on death and was excluded from the principal value of the estate for estate duty.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 03 Aug 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 20 Nov 2015 12:02:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=78763" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1998 (8) TMI 86 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40221</link>
      <description>A wakf-alal-aulad recognised under Mohammedan law was held valid despite objections based on the rule against perpetuity, because section 2 of the Transfer of Property Act preserves the operation of Mohammedan law and sections 13 and 14 do not invalidate such a dedication. The permanent dedication of property for descendants and thereafter for a religious or charitable object was therefore effective, and the settlor ceased to own the property on creation of the wakf. As the settlor had divested title and retained no interest at death, the corpus of the valid wakf was not property passing on death and was excluded from the principal value of the estate for estate duty.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 03 Aug 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40221</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>