<?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>2024 (2) TMI 1670 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=469396</link>
    <description>A venture capital fund registered as a trust was treated as eligible for exemption under section 10(23FB) on income from temporary investment of unutilised funds in mutual funds, because such deployment was permitted by the trust deed and private placement memorandum and could not be denied merely on alleged SEBI non-compliance absent any adverse SEBI action. Dividend income was also treated as separately exempt under sections 10(34) and 10(35), as section 10(23FB) did not exclude other independently exempt income streams. Reopening under sections 147 and 148 was held unsustainable because it rested on the same material already examined in scrutiny and amounted to a change of opinion.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 29 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 16 Jun 2026 14:49:28 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=907239" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (2) TMI 1670 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=469396</link>
      <description>A venture capital fund registered as a trust was treated as eligible for exemption under section 10(23FB) on income from temporary investment of unutilised funds in mutual funds, because such deployment was permitted by the trust deed and private placement memorandum and could not be denied merely on alleged SEBI non-compliance absent any adverse SEBI action. Dividend income was also treated as separately exempt under sections 10(34) and 10(35), as section 10(23FB) did not exclude other independently exempt income streams. Reopening under sections 147 and 148 was held unsustainable because it rested on the same material already examined in scrutiny and amounted to a change of opinion.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 29 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=469396</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>