DCIT, LUCKNOW vs. DR R M LOHIA INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCES (PAN-AAATD9802F), LUCKNOW

ITA 957/LKW/2025Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow17 July 2026AY 2020-217 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that a demand under Section 156 can only be issued when a sum is actually payable. Since the assessment order determined the income and tax liability as Nil, raising a demand was contradictory and bad in law. The order of the NFAC allowing the refund was confirmed.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a registered society substantially funded by the UP government, did not file its return of income. Proceedings under Section 147 were initiated, and the assessee filed a return declaring Nil income and claiming a refund. The Assessing Officer accepted Nil income but denied the refund, raising a substantial demand. The NFAC allowed the refund, holding the demand to be erroneous.

What were the issues?

Whether a demand under Section 156 can be raised when the assessed income and tax liability are Nil, and whether the assessee is entitled to a refund in such circumstances.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 148,Section 143(3),Section 144B,Section 156,Section 237,Section 239,Section 139

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, LUCKNOW BENCH “A”, LUCKNOW

Before: SHRI. SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA & SHRI NIKHIL CHOUDHARY

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Yadav, D.R

PER SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, J.M.:

This appeal has been preferred by the Revenue against the order dated 09.10.2025, passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (NFAC) for Assessment Year 2020-21. 2.0 The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a Registered Society incorporated by the Government of Uttar Pradesh. As per its objects, it was established for imparting medical education and public health services to the General Public without differentiation between any caste or creed. The assessee is substantially funded by the Government of Uttar Pradesh and is admittedly covered under section 10(23C)(iiiac) of ITA No.957/LKW/2025 the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called 'the Act’). The assessee had not filed the ret

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →