https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=794542 Under the statutory scheme discussed, section 13(1)(c) limits denial of exemption under sections 11 and 12 to the income or expenditure that directly or indirectly benefits persons specified in section 13(3); it does not justify wholesale denial of exemption. The note also states that revenue expenditure paid to a concern is not disallowable merely because of alleged specified-concern status where the voting-power threshold is not met, and that procedural mistakes in Form 10B are not fatal. For capital expenditure, invoices and supporting documents were treated as sufficient, and non-mention in Form 10B, absence of open tender, and alleged non-response to notice under section 133(6) were not regarded as defeating the claim. en-us Thu, 02 Jul 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 07 Jul 2026 08:39:46 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=794542 Under the statutory scheme discussed, section 13(1)(c) limits denial of exemption under sections 11 and 12 to the income or expenditure that directly or indirectly benefits persons specified in section 13(3); it does not justify wholesale denial of exemption. The note also states that revenue expenditure paid to a concern is not disallowable merely because of alleged specified-concern status where the voting-power threshold is not met, and that procedural mistakes in Form 10B are not fatal. For capital expenditure, invoices and supporting documents were treated as sufficient, and non-mention in Form 10B, absence of open tender, and alleged non-response to notice under section 133(6) were not regarded as defeating the claim. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 02 Jul 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=794542