MORADABAD DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,MORADABAD vs. DY. CIT(EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW

In the result, ITA No. 1071/Del/2020, ITA No

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudharyita Nos.273,199/Lkw/2019 A.Ys. 2014-15 & 2015-16 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. M/S Moradabad Development (Exemption), Lucknow Authority, Kanth Road, Moradabad Pan:Aajfm7731M (Appellant) (Respondent)

section 2(15) and the various case laws on the subject, which again were outside the purview of jurisdiction under section 154 and his own powers under section 250. 23. It may not be out of place to mention at this stage, that the Hon’ble Lucknow Bench of the ITAT has dealt with this issue (of violation of section

DY. CIT(EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW vs. MORADABAD DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, MORADABAD

In the result, ITA No. 1071/Del/2020, ITA No

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudharyita Nos.273,199/Lkw/2019 A.Ys. 2014-15 & 2015-16 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. M/S Moradabad Development (Exemption), Lucknow Authority, Kanth Road, Moradabad Pan:Aajfm7731M (Appellant) (Respondent)

section 2(15) and the various case laws on the subject, which again were outside the purview of jurisdiction under section 154 and his own powers under section 250. 23. It may not be out of place to mention at this stage, that the Hon’ble Lucknow Bench of the ITAT has dealt with this issue (of violation of section

MORADABAD DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,MORADABAD vs. DCIT(EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW

In the result, ITA No. 1071/Del/2020, ITA No

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudharyita Nos.273,199/Lkw/2019 A.Ys. 2014-15 & 2015-16 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. M/S Moradabad Development (Exemption), Lucknow Authority, Kanth Road, Moradabad Pan:Aajfm7731M (Appellant) (Respondent)

section 2(15) and the various case laws on the subject, which again were outside the purview of jurisdiction under section 154 and his own powers under section 250. 23. It may not be out of place to mention at this stage, that the Hon’ble Lucknow Bench of the ITAT has dealt with this issue (of violation of section

MORADABAD DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,MORADABAD vs. DCIT(EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW

In the result, ITA No. 1071/Del/2020, ITA No

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudharyita Nos.273,199/Lkw/2019 A.Ys. 2014-15 & 2015-16 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. M/S Moradabad Development (Exemption), Lucknow Authority, Kanth Road, Moradabad Pan:Aajfm7731M (Appellant) (Respondent)

section 2(15) and the various case laws on the subject, which again were outside the purview of jurisdiction under section 154 and his own powers under section 250. 23. It may not be out of place to mention at this stage, that the Hon’ble Lucknow Bench of the ITAT has dealt with this issue (of violation of section

ARPIT KUMAR TOMAR,UTTAR PRADESH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, LUCKNOW

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

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshraassessment Year: 2019-20 Arpit Kumar Tomar Income Tax Officer V. Flat No.B3, B21, Krishna 6(1), Lucknow, Uttar Garden, Sadarpur, Ghaziabad, Pradesh. Uttar Pradesh-201021. Pan:Ajbpt8004B (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri V. Balaji, Fca Respondent By: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, Addl. Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing: 13 02 2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 24 02 2025 O R D E R

12A shall be in Form No.108. In other words, where the total income of the trust or institute as computed under the Act without giving effect to the provisions of section 11 and section 12 exceeds the maximum amount which is not chargeable to income tax in any previous year. The accounts of the trust or institution for that year

CENTRAL METHODIST CHURCH,LUCKNOW vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: SH. SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY (Accountant Member)

section 2 Central Methodist Church A.Y. 2022-23 12A(1)(b) of the Income Tax Act, whereas the assessee had duly filed the Form No. 10B on 7.11.2022. It was pointed out that a petition for condonation of delay

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)

delay in filing of both appeals on account of ignorance of the passing of orders, is hereby condoned. 3. The facts of the case are, that the assessee filed an application dated 13.08.2022 for registration under section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Income Tax Act, in Form 10AB. The ld. CIT(Exemption) noted, that Form 10AB

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)

delay in filing of both appeals on account of ignorance of the passing of orders, is hereby condoned. 3. The facts of the case are, that the assessee filed an application dated 13.08.2022 for registration under section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Income Tax Act, in Form 10AB. The ld. CIT(Exemption) noted, that Form 10AB

MEDICAL EDUCATIONAL & CULTURE DEVELOPMENT SOCIETY,KANPUR vs. ITO (EXEMPTION), KANPUR

In the result, all the three appeals of the Assessee stand allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Nikhil Choudhary

B, Fazalganuj Kanpur Kanpur (U.P) TAN/PAN:AABTM7022M (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Shri P. K. Kapoor, C.A. Respondent by: Shri Amit Singh Chauhan, D.R. O R D E R PER BENCH: These appeals have been preferred by the Assessee against separate orders, all dated 09.09.2024, passed by the Addl/JCIT(A), Mysore for Assessment Years

MEDICAL EDUCATIONAL & CULTURAL DEVELOPMENT SOCIETY,KANPUR vs. ITO (EXEMPTION), KANPUR

In the result, all the three appeals of the Assessee stand allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Nikhil Choudhary

B, Fazalganuj Kanpur Kanpur (U.P) TAN/PAN:AABTM7022M (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Shri P. K. Kapoor, C.A. Respondent by: Shri Amit Singh Chauhan, D.R. O R D E R PER BENCH: These appeals have been preferred by the Assessee against separate orders, all dated 09.09.2024, passed by the Addl/JCIT(A), Mysore for Assessment Years

MEDICAL EDUCATIONAL & CULTURAL DEVELOPMENT SOCIETY,KANPUR vs. ITO (EXEMPTION), KANPUR

In the result, all the three appeals of the Assessee stand allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Nikhil Choudhary

B, Fazalganuj Kanpur Kanpur (U.P) TAN/PAN:AABTM7022M (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Shri P. K. Kapoor, C.A. Respondent by: Shri Amit Singh Chauhan, D.R. O R D E R PER BENCH: These appeals have been preferred by the Assessee against separate orders, all dated 09.09.2024, passed by the Addl/JCIT(A), Mysore for Assessment Years

CHARAK HELTH CARE & RURAL DEVELOPMENT SOCIETY,LUCKNOW vs. DCIT-CC-2, LUCKNOW

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

Bench: SH. SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY (Accountant Member)

B’ BENCH, LUCKNOW BEFORE SH. SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER A.Y. 2013-14 Charak Health Care & Rural vs. The CPC, Bangalore /DCIT/ACIT Development Society 54, Shastri (Central Circle)-2, Income Tax Nagar, Lucknow-226001 Office, Lucknow PAN: AAEFC9409P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Sh. Suyash Agarwal, Adv Revenue by: Sh. Vachaspati Tripathi, CIT DR Date

UTTAR PRADESH CRICKET ASSOCIATION,KANPUR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW

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

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudharya.Y. N.A. Uttar Pradesh Cricket Association, Vs. The Cit (Exemption), E-23, Kamla Nagar Township, Lucknow Nazirabad, Kanpur-208005 Pan:Aaacu7822R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sh. Rakesh Garg, Advocate Revenue By: Sh. R.K. Agarwal, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 30.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 29.08.2025 O R D E R Per Nikhil Choudhary, A.M.: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Cit(Exemption), Under Section 12Ab(1)(B)(Ii)(B) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, Rejecting The Application Moved For Registration Of The Said Society Under Section 12Ab(B) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. The Grounds Of Appeal Are As Under: - “01. Because The Cit (Exemptions) Has Erred On Facts & In Law In Rejecting The Application Moved For Registration Under Section 12A(B) Of The Income- Tax Act, 1961, Which Rejection Is Contrary To Facts, Bad In Law, The Registration As Claimed Be Granted. 02. Because The Cit(E) Has Erred On Facts & In Law In Holding That No Response Had Been Filed To His Letter Dated 11.07.2024 Which Is Incorrect, In As Much As, Response Was Filed On 26.07.2024 Vide Letter Dated 25.07.2024 As Such, Rejecting The Application Without Considering The Submission Is Erroneous, Misconceived, The Order Passed Be Set Aside & Registration Claimed Be Granted.

b) of the Income- tax Act, 1961, which rejection is contrary to facts, bad in law, the registration as claimed be granted. 02. Because the CIT(E) has erred on facts and in law in holding that no response had been filed to his letter dated 11.07.2024 which is incorrect, in as much as, response was filed on 26.07.2024 vide

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) LUCKNOW, LUCKNOW vs. UTTAR PRADESH WATER SUPPLY AND SANITATION MISSION, LUCKNOW

In the result, both appeals are partly allowed

Bench: SHRI KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT\nAND\nSHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA (Accountant Member)

condone such delay as per section\n119(2)(b)\".\n\n6. 27. Since the appellant has not furnished any order passed by CIT(Exemption)\ncondoning the delay in filing of Form 10B, the AO has rightly denied the exemption\nclaimed u/s.11 of the Act and therefore, it does not warrant any interference.\nAppellant's Ground Nos.2 to 11 are partly

GALLANTT FOUNDATION (FORMERLY KNOWN AS GOVIND FOUNDATION),GORAKHPUR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW

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

Bench: SH. SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY (Accountant Member)

1)(ii)(B) and section 80G(5)(ii)(b) of the Act and therefore, after receipt of such advice, the assessee promptly filed the appeal before the ITAT, Lucknow on 25.09.2023. However, these appeals were late by eight days and it was prayed that in view of the aforesaid circumstances, the delays may kindly be condoned. 5. We have duly

GALLANTT FOUNDATION( FORMERLY KNOWN AS GOVIND FOUNDATION),GORAKHPUR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW

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

Bench: SH. SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY (Accountant Member)

1)(ii)(B) and section 80G(5)(ii)(b) of the Act and therefore, after receipt of such advice, the assessee promptly filed the appeal before the ITAT, Lucknow on 25.09.2023. However, these appeals were late by eight days and it was prayed that in view of the aforesaid circumstances, the delays may kindly be condoned. 5. We have duly

UTTAR PRADESH WATER SUPPLY AND SANITATION MISSION,LUCKNOW vs. ACIT(EXEMPTION) CIRCLE, LUCKNOW

In the result, both appeals are partly allowed

condone such delay as per section\n119(2)(b)\".\n6. 27. Since the appellant has not furnished any order passed by CIT(Exemption)\ncondoning the delay in filing of Form 10B, the AO has rightly denied the exemption\nclaimed u/s.11 of the Act and therefore, it does not warrant any interference.\nAppellant's Ground Nos.2 to 11 are partly allowed

UDAAN SEWA SAMITI,KANPUR NAGAR vs. CPC BANGLORE, KANPUR

The appeal of the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2020-21 Udaan Seva Samiti V. The Cpc 250/4, Juhi Lal Colony Bangalore Kanpur Nagar Uttar Pradesh Tan/Pan:Aaaau7543F (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Samrat Chandra, C.A. Respondent By: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, D.R. O R D E R This Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 23.11.2023, Passed By The Addl/Jcit(A)-2, Mumbai For Assessment Year 2019-20. 3.1 The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is A Society Registered Under Section 12Aa Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called “The Act’). The Assessee-Society Filed Its Return Of Income For The Year Under Consideration Under Section 139(1) On 26.01.2021, Declaring Total Income At Nil. The Assessee-Society Had Claimed Exemption Of Rs.12,97,442/- Relating To The Amount Applied For Charitable & Religious Purposes During The Previous Year. The Central Processing Centre (Cpc) Processed The Return Under Section 143(1) Of The Act

12A of the Act and in this case, Form 10B was filed belatedly by the assessee although the original Audit Report in Form 10B had been filed by the assessee before the due date, but ITA No.150/LKW/2024 Page 5 of 9 Form 10B was subsequently revised and submitted after the due date. It was submitted that the return of income

THE MORADABAD BRANCH OF INDIA MEDICAL ASSOCIATION,MORADABAD vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW

The appeal of the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Nikhil Choudharyassessment Year: 2017-18 The Moradabad Branch Of India V. The Commissioner Of Income Medical Association Tax (Exemptions) Ima Bhawan, Opp. Ssp Office Lucknow Court Compound, Civil Lines Moradabad Tan/Pan:Aacar2817P (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Sourabh Gupta, C.A. Respondent By: Shri S. H. Usmani, Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing: 13 08 2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 30 09 2024 O R D E R

B”, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI. SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI NIKHIL CHOUDHARY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2017-18 The Moradabad Branch of India v. The Commissioner of Income Medical Association Tax (Exemptions) IMA Bhawan, Opp. SSP Office Lucknow Court Compound, Civil Lines Moradabad TAN/PAN:AACAR2817P (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Shri Sourabh Gupta, C.A. Respondent by: Shri S. H. Usmani