https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=767786 Delhi HC upheld ITAT's decision allowing exemption u/s 11 and 12 to the assessee. AO had denied exemption claiming violation of Section 13(1)(d) through equity share investments and assessed income at Maximum Marginal Rate under Section 164(2). HC ruled that fund application in BARC did not constitute investment under Section 11(5) read with Section 13(1)(d) as deployment was made pursuant to statutory/regulatory obligation to further charitable objectives, not to yield income or profit. Appeal decided against revenue. en-us Thu, 20 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 25 Mar 2025 08:48:17 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=767786 Delhi HC upheld ITAT's decision allowing exemption u/s 11 and 12 to the assessee. AO had denied exemption claiming violation of Section 13(1)(d) through equity share investments and assessed income at Maximum Marginal Rate under Section 164(2). HC ruled that fund application in BARC did not constitute investment under Section 11(5) read with Section 13(1)(d) as deployment was made pursuant to statutory/regulatory obligation to further charitable objectives, not to yield income or profit. Appeal decided against revenue. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 20 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=767786