<?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>2011 (5) TMI 1164 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=467957</link>
    <description>While considering renewal of recognition under Section 80G, the authority&#039;s enquiry is confined to the statutory conditions for that recognition and does not extend to a broader assessment-style examination of alleged violation of Sections 11(5) and 13(1)(d)(iia). On the stated facts, the entity already held Section 12A registration and existing Section 80G recognition, and the material showed that the funds were used only for charitable objects; the donated shares had also been sold and the balance was nil. The refusal of renewal on the alleged contraventions was therefore unwarranted, and no substantial question of law arose.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 24 May 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Apr 2026 15:00:44 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=896193" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (5) TMI 1164 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=467957</link>
      <description>While considering renewal of recognition under Section 80G, the authority&#039;s enquiry is confined to the statutory conditions for that recognition and does not extend to a broader assessment-style examination of alleged violation of Sections 11(5) and 13(1)(d)(iia). On the stated facts, the entity already held Section 12A registration and existing Section 80G recognition, and the material showed that the funds were used only for charitable objects; the donated shares had also been sold and the balance was nil. The refusal of renewal on the alleged contraventions was therefore unwarranted, and no substantial question of law arose.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 24 May 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=467957</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>