ROHILKHAND EDUCATIONAL CHARITABLE TRUST,BAREILLY vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, BAREILLY

In the result, both appeals of the assessee in ITA No

natural justice, she held that at the\ntime of passing the order, the assessee trust did not have registration under\nsection 12A of the Act and the registration was only subsequently restored by the\nITAT. The ld. AO was justified in completing assessment based on the facts\nprevailing at the time when he passed the order. Further, she noted that

GURU MAHIMA ASHRAM,MATHURA vs. CIT, EXEMPTION, LUCKNOW

In the result, both appeals of the assessee in ITA

charitable nature\nand genuineness of the trust's activities are well-established and\nduly supported by facts and records.”\n3. The present appeal is barred by limitation for 87 days. The\nassessee has filed an application seeking condonation of delay in\nfiling of this appeal. The explanation furnished by the Ld.\nCounsel for the assessee is poorly drafted, although

TULSI GRAMODYOG SEWA SAMITI,,LUCKNOW vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(EXEMPTIONS), LUCKNOW

In the result, the appeals of the assessee stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

justice, be quashed. 02. Because the CIT(Exemption) has failed to appreciate that the objects of the said assessee society are purely charitable and the activities carried on by it are in accordance with its objects, the twin conditions i.e. the “objects being charitable” and “activities being in accordance with the objects”, not being in dispute, the CIT (Exemption

TULSI GRAMODYOG SEWA SAMITI,LUCKNOW vs. THE CIT (EXEMPTIONS), LUCKNOW, LUCKNOW

In the result, the appeals of the assessee stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

justice, be quashed. 02. Because the CIT(Exemption) has failed to appreciate that the objects of the said assessee society are purely charitable and the activities carried on by it are in accordance with its objects, the twin conditions i.e. the “objects being charitable” and “activities being in accordance with the objects”, not being in dispute, the CIT (Exemption

M/S AYODHYA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY(FORMERLY AYODHYA FAIZABAD DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY),AYODHYA vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudhary

natural justice. 2. The Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeal) has erred in law and on facts in passing the order without giving adequate opportunity of being heard and without considering the written submission made before him. 3. That the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) erred in law and on facts in confirming the denial of exemption under section

GURU MAHIMA ASHRAM,MATHURA vs. CIT EXEMPTION, LUCKNOW

In the result, both appeals of the assessee in ITA

charitable nature\nand genuineness of the trust's activities are well-established and\nduly supported by facts and records.\"\n\n3. The present appeal is barred by limitation for 87 days. The\nassessee has filed an application seeking condonation of delay in\nfiling of this appeal. The explanation furnished by the Ld.\nCounsel for the assessee is poorly drafted, although

MAA NARMADA GANGA ANNAKSHETRA,RISHIKESH vs. CIT EXEMPTION, LUCKNOW

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

Bench: SH. KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY (Accountant Member)

Natural Justice. 6) That the appellant craves the leave to add, modify, amend or delete any of the grounds of appeal at the time of hearing and all the above grounds are without prejudice to each other.” 2. The facts of the case are that the assessee filed an application for the registration of the trust under section

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, BAREILLY, BAREILLY vs. VARUNARJUN TRUST, LUCKNOW

In the result, both the appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

charitable or religious institution, any income thereof, if for any period during the previous year— (i) any funds of the trust or institution are invested or deposited after the 28th day of February, 1983 otherwise than in any one or more of the forms or modes specified in sub-section (5) of section 11; or (ii) any funds

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL CIRCLE), BAREILLY vs. VARUNARJUN TRUST, LUCKNOW

In the result, both the appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

charitable or religious institution, any income thereof, if for any period during the previous year— (i) any funds of the trust or institution are invested or deposited after the 28th day of February, 1983 otherwise than in any one or more of the forms or modes specified in sub-section (5) of section 11; or (ii) any funds

U.P HOUSING & DEVELOPMENT BOARD,LUCKNOW vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-2(3), LUCKNOW

In the result ITA Nos.532 & 533/Lkw/2014 and ITA Nos

justice to the extent stated in the foregoing grounds.”\n\nITA No.21/LKW/2019\n1) Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law by directing the AO to compute the income as per direction given by the CIT(A)-1, Lucknow in the manner specified in section 11 of the Act taking into account information given in audit report in form 10B, ignoring

RAM SWAROOP MEMORIAL CHARITABLE TRUST,BAREILLY vs. C.I.T. (E), LUCKNOW

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.33/Lkw/2021

natural justice, hence the impugned order of cancellation deserves to be ITAT-Lucknow Page 2 of 5 Ram Swaroop Memorial Charitable Trust

M/S AYODHYA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (FORMELY AYODHYA FAIZABAD DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY),LUCKNOW vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW, LUCKNOW

In the result all six appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

natural justice. \n2. The Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeal) has erred in law and on facts in passing the \norder without giving adequate opportunity of being heard and without considering the \nwritten submission made before him. \n3. That the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) erred in law and on facts in \nconfirming the denial of exemption under section

M/S AYODHYA FAIZABAD DEVELOPEMENT AUTHORITY,FAIZABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW

natural justice.\n2. The Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeal) has erred in law and on facts in passing the \norder without giving adequate opportunity of being heard and without considering the \nwritten submission made before him.\n3. That the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) erred in law and on facts in \nconfirming the denial of exemption under section

M/S AYODHYA FAIZABAD DEVELOPEMENT AUTHORITY,FAIZABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW

natural justice. \n2. The Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeal) has erred in law and on facts in passing the \norder without giving adequate opportunity of being heard and without considering the \nwritten submission made before him. \n11\n3. That the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) erred in law and on facts in \nconfirming the denial of exemption under

M/S HINDUSTAN SEVA TRUST,SHAHJAHANPUR vs. CIT EXEMPTION, LUCKNOW

In the result, both the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: SH. KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY (Accountant Member)

charitable nature of the trust activities. Moreover, since the trust already enjoyed exemption due to provisional registration under both sections 12A and 80G, and the same had not been withdrawn by the ld. CIT(Exemption), no prejudice was caused to the assessee and therefore, there was no reason to restore the matter back to the file

M/S HINDUSTAN SEVA TRUST,SHAHJAHANPUR vs. CIT EXEMPTION, LUCKNOW

In the result, both the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: SH. KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY (Accountant Member)

charitable nature of the trust activities. Moreover, since the trust already enjoyed exemption due to provisional registration under both sections 12A and 80G, and the same had not been withdrawn by the ld. CIT(Exemption), no prejudice was caused to the assessee and therefore, there was no reason to restore the matter back to the file

INCOME TAX OFFICER-2(3), LUCKNOW vs. U.P AWAS EVAM VIKAS PARISHAD, LUCKNOW

In the result ITA Nos.532 & 533/Lkw/2014 and ITA Nos

justice to the extent stated in the foregoing grounds.”\n\nITA No.21/LKW/2019\n\n1) Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law by directing the AO to compute the income as per\ndirection given by the CIT(A)-1, Lucknow in the manner specified in section 11 of the\nAct taking into account information given in audit report in form

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW vs. M/S U.P AWAS EVAM VIKAS PARISHAD, LUCKNOW

In the result ITA Nos.532 & 533/Lkw/2014 and ITA Nos

justice to the extent stated in the foregoing grounds.”\n\nITA No.21/LKW/2019\n1) Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law by directing the AO to compute the income as per\ndirection given by the CIT(A)-1, Lucknow in the manner specified in section 11 of the\nAct taking into account information given in audit report in form 10B, ignoring

INCOME TAX OFFICER-2(3), LUCKNOW vs. U.P AWAS EVAM VIKAS PARISHAD, LUCKNOW

In the result ITA Nos.532 & 533/Lkw/2014 and ITA Nos

justice to the extent stated in the foregoing grounds.”\nITA No.21/LKW/2019\n1) Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law by directing the AO to compute the income as per\ndirection given by the CIT(A)-1, Lucknow in the manner specified in section 11 of the\nAct taking into account information given in audit report in form 10B, ignoring