M/S SUSHILA DEVI CENTRE FOR PROFESSIONAL STUDIES AND RESEARCH,DEHRADUN vs. PCIT (CENTRAL), KANPUR (JAO- DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, DEHRADUN), DEHRADUN

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

12A on that date for grant of registration.\n14.4 However, as far as provision of cancellation of the registration provided by sub-\nsection (4) of section 12AA is concerned, sub-section (4) of section 12AB brings into\nplace a completely new self-contained procedural code for conducting inquiry about\n'specified violations', cancelling registration or refusing to cancel registration.\n14.5

INSTITUTE OF CLINICAL RESEARCH INDIA SOCIETY,DEHRADUN vs. CIT(A), DEHRADUN

Appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Video Conferencing) Assessment Year: 2012-13 Institute Of Clinical Research Vs. Commissioner Of Income India Society, Tax (Appeals), 1St Floor, Building No.1, Dehradun Treenetra Vihar, Near Kargt Chowk, Dehradun Pan :Aabai3710P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By None Department By Sh. Amar Pal Singh, Sr. Dr

charitable activities have been recognised by the Department and a certificates under section 12A and 80G has also been granted by the competent authority. During the course of the scrutiny proceeding, the Assessing Officer on perusal of auditor's 2 | P a g e report enclosed with the return found that the assessee did not deduct TDS on certain amounts

K L D A V COLLEGE,ROORKEE, HARIDWAR vs. ITO WARD 1(3)(4), ROORKEE, HARIDWAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member), SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (Accountant Member)

Trust in ITA No.3533/Mum/2023 wherien vide order dated 07.05.2024 the appeal was allowed in favour of the assessee by condoning the delay caused in filing of Form 10B. Accordingly, ld. AR requested to allow the exemption u/s 12A to the assessee. 5. On the other hand, Ld. DR vehemently supported the orders of the lower authorities and requested to confirm

VIVEKANAND VIDYAPITH TRUST,DEHRADUN vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTION WARD,DEHRADUN, DEHRADUN

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Satbeer Singh Godara(Through Video Conferencing) M/S. Vivekanand Vidyapith Trust, Vs. Ito, Vivekanand Gram Jogiwala, Exemption Ward, Dehradun, Uttrakhand-248 001 Dehradun (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaatv5303K Assessee By : Shri Somil Jain, Adv Shri Shrey Jain, Adv Revenue By: Shri Amar Pal Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 18/03/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 02/04/2025

2. Though the assessee has raised several grounds of appeal before us, the only effective issue to be decided in this appeal is as to whether the Learned CPC was justified in denying the exemption under Section 11 of the M/s. Vivekanand Vidyapith Trust Act on the ground that assessee did not apply for fresh registration under the amended provisions

RAJPUT PANCHAYAT DHARMSHALA,HARIDWAR, UTTRAKHAND vs. ITO (EXEMPTION) DEHRADUN, DEHRADUN

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed as above

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

2) of the Income Tax Rules mandated filing of the audit report in Form 10B electronically. It was contended that there was no time limit prescribed for filing the ITR and the audit report in Form 10B. The Ld. AR further submitted that the section 12(1)(ba) of the Act was brought in the Statute from 01.04.2018. The section

RAJPUT PANCHAYAT DHARMSHALA,HARIDWAR, UTTRAKHAND vs. ITO (EXEMPTION) DEHRADUN, DEHRADUN

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed as above

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

2) of the Income Tax Rules mandated filing of the audit report in Form 10B electronically. It was contended that there was no time limit prescribed for filing the ITR and the audit report in Form 10B. The Ld. AR further submitted that the section 12(1)(ba) of the Act was brought in the Statute from 01.04.2018. The section

CHAUDHARY HARCHAND SINGH ATMA RAM EDUCATION TRUST,ROORKEE vs. CIT(E), LUCKNOW

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Usita No.6240/Del./2017: Asstt. Year: 2016-17 Chaudhary Harchand Singh Atma Vs Cit(E), Ram Education Trust, Lucknow C/O. Parikshit Aggarwal Fca, House No. 1238, Sec-22B, Chandigarh (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabtc2457J Assessee By : Sh. None Revenue By : Smt. Mayank Prabha Tomar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 14.12.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 16.12.2022

Section 12AA of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. That on the facts, circumstances and legal position of the case, the Worthy CIT has erred in rejecting the application of the appellant for grant of registration u/s 12AA of the Act even when the objects of the appellant are charitable in nature. Worthy CIT (A) further erred in not understanding

SHRI NARAYAN TRUST,SRINAGAR vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kambleshri Narayan Trust Vs Cit (Exemption), Lucknow Near Base Hospital, Srikot Gomti Nagar, Lucknow, Ganganali, Up 226010 Srinagar (Gwl), 246174 Uttarakhand (Appellant) (Respondent)

charitable purposes’ as defined in section 2(15) of the Act. V. The Appellant craves leave for reserving the right to amend, modify, alter, add or forego any ground(s) of appeal at any time before or during the hearing of this appeal.” 3. The applicant society/trust filed an application for registration u/s 12A(a) of the Income

LITTLE SCHOLAR PRATHMIK VIDHYALAYA SHIKSHA SANSTHAN,KASHIPUR vs. ITO, DEHRADUN

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Satbeer Singh Godara(Through Video Conferencing) Little Scholar Prathmik Vs. Cit(E), Vidhyalaya Shiksha Samiti, Lucknow Bhalla Farm,Ramnagar, Kashipur, Uttarakhand 244713 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aaaal2930K Assessee By : None Revenue By: Shri Amar Pal Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 18/03/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 18/03/2025

2. At the outset, we find that the appeal preferred by the assessee before us is delayed by 56 days. Considering the reason adduced in the condonation petition, we are inclined to condone the delay in the interest of substantial justice and admit the appeal for adjudication. 3. None appeared on behalf of the assessee despite issuance of notice. Hence