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)

section 80G(5) is delayed by 462 days. The assessee has filed condonation petitions for the delay, in which it has been

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)

section 80G(5) is delayed by 462 days. The assessee has filed condonation petitions for the delay, in which it has been

ABHAY CHARAN TEACHING INSTITUTE OF VEDIC EDUCATION ASSOCIATION,LUCKNOW, UTTAR PRADESH vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW, UTTAR PRADESH, LUCKNOW, UTTAR PRADESH

In the result, both appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

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

condone the delay in filing the appeal and admit the same for adjudication. 4. The facts of the case are that, the assessee, which is a company incorporated under section 8 of the Companies Act, 2018 filed an application before the ld. CIT (Exemption) for registration under section 12AB and for approval under section 80G(5

ABHAY CHARAN TEACHING INSTITUTE OF VEDIC EDUCATION ASSOCIATION,LUCKNOW, UTTAR PRADESH vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW, UTTAR PRADESH, LUCKNOW, UTTAR PRADESH

In the result, both appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

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

condone the delay in filing the appeal and admit the same for adjudication. 4. The facts of the case are that, the assessee, which is a company incorporated under section 8 of the Companies Act, 2018 filed an application before the ld. CIT (Exemption) for registration under section 12AB and for approval under section 80G(5

MAHILA EVAM BAL VIKAS MAJDOOR UTTHAN SAMITI,UDHAM SINGH NAGAR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(E), LUCKNOW

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

Bench: Shri. A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoorassessment Year: N.A. Mahila Evam Bal Vikas Majdoor V. Cit (Exemption) Utthan Samiti Lucknow Nai Basti Hera Ward No.05 Rudrapur, U.S. Nagar Tan/Pan:Aadam4434C (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Umesh Kumar, Secretary Of The Assessee Society Respondent By: Smt. Sheela Chopra, Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing: 10 03 2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 28 03 2022 O R D E R

5)(vi) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, rejecting the application for grant of approval under section 80G of the Act. 2. There is a delay of 23 days in filing of the appeal. As per the application for condonation

SAI SEVA SANSTHAN,KANPUR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LUCKNOW

The appeals of the assessee stand allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Nikhil Choudhary

condone the delay in filing of the appeals and admit the appeals for hearing. 6. During the course of hearing, the Ld. Authorized Representative for the assessee (Ld. A.R.) submitted before us that the applications of the assessee for registration under section 12A of the Act and grant of approval under section 80G(5

SAI SEVA SANSTHAN,KANPUR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , LUCKNOW

The appeals of the assessee stand allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Nikhil Choudhary

condone the delay in filing of the appeals and admit the appeals for hearing. 6. During the course of hearing, the Ld. Authorized Representative for the assessee (Ld. A.R.) submitted before us that the applications of the assessee for registration under section 12A of the Act and grant of approval under section 80G(5

GURU MAHIMA ASHRAM,MATHURA vs. CIT EXEMPTION, LUCKNOW

In the result, both appeals of the assessee in ITA

sections": ["12A", "80G(5)(iv)", "10AB"], "issues": "Whether the assessee was denied a fair opportunity to present its case due to the unavailability of its founder, and if the delay in compliance with notices can be condoned

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

In the result, both appeals of the assessee in ITA

condoned the delay, set aside the impugned orders, and restored the applications to the file of the Ld. CIT(E) for fresh decision after providing adequate opportunity.", "result": "Partly Allowed", "sections": [ "12A", "80G(5

WSG VENTURE PVT. LTD.,KANPUR vs. DCT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), KANPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudharya.Y. 2022-23 Wsg Venture Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Dcit, 1-59, Mig, Word Bank Barra, Circle 2(1)(1), Kanpur Kanpur-208027 Pan:Aaccw7342L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: None Revenue By: Sh. Sunil Kumar Rajwanshi, Addl. Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 21.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 29.05.2025 O R D E R Per Nikhil Choudhary, A.M.: This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Pcit-1, Kanpur Passed Under Section 119 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 On 5.12.2024 Refusing To Condone The Delay In Filing The Income Tax Return For The Assessment Year 2022-23 With The Claimed Refund Of Rs. 10,000/-. The Grounds Of Appeal Are As Under:- “01. That Due To Mistake Of Counsel, The Itr For The Ay 2022-23 Could Not Be Filed Of The Assessee Company, Whereas The Certificate Of The Counsel Was Also Filed, But Ignore The Same & Rejected The Petition Moved U/S.119(2)(B) Of The Act, Which Action Of The Pr. Cit Is Contrary To Fact & Be Quashed. 02. That The Order Passed By The Pr. Cit U/S.119 Of The Income Tax Act Reject The Petition For Condonation Of Delay Moved U/S.119(2)(B) Of The Act Is Not Lawful, Bad In Law, Be Quashed. 03. That The Pr. Cit As Well As Cpc Has Erred On Facts & In Law In Arbitrarily Rejecting The Petition Of The Assessee Company To Rectify The Return Of Income, Which Should Ought To Have Done. A.Y. 2022-23 Wsg Venture Pvt. Ltd. 04. That The Order Passed By The Pr. Cit U/S 119 Dated 05.12.2024 Is Erroneous, Misconceived, Contrary To Facts, Bad In Law & Be Modified.”

condonation of delay moved u/s.119(2)(b) of the Act is not lawful, bad in law, be quashed. 03. THAT the Pr. CIT as well as CPC has erred on facts and in law in arbitrarily rejecting the petition of the assessee company to rectify the return of income, which should ought to have done. A.Y. 2022-23 WSG Venture

J AND A MEMORIAL CHARITABLE SOCIETY,BAREILLY vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (E), LUCKNOW

Bench: Shri. Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

section 80G(5)(vi) of the I.T. Act, respectively. 2. None has appeared on behalf of the assessee when these appeals were called for hearing. An application for adjournment has been filed by the ld. Counsel for the assessee, however, we find that the impugned orders have been passed by the CIT (Exemption) without considering the relevant facts and record

J AND A MEMORIAL CHARITABLE SOCIETY,BAREILLY vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (E), LUCKNOW

Bench: Shri. Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

section 80G(5)(vi) of the I.T. Act, respectively. 2. None has appeared on behalf of the assessee when these appeals were called for hearing. An application for adjournment has been filed by the ld. Counsel for the assessee, however, we find that the impugned orders have been passed by the CIT (Exemption) without considering the relevant facts and record

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

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed whereas the Cross Objections of the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoor

condoned the delay in filing the Cross Objections and asked learned CIT, D.R. to proceed with her arguments on the Cross Objections. 4. Learned CIT, D.R. submitted that the Cross Objections are similar to the additional grounds of Revenue taken by the Revenue in the appeals no.630, Page 8 of 86 (UP AWAS EVAM VIKAS PARISHAD) 631 and others which

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

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed whereas the Cross Objections of the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoor

condoned the delay in filing the Cross Objections and asked learned CIT, D.R. to proceed with her arguments on the Cross Objections. 4. Learned CIT, D.R. submitted that the Cross Objections are similar to the additional grounds of Revenue taken by the Revenue in the appeals no.630, Page 8 of 86 (UP AWAS EVAM VIKAS PARISHAD) 631 and others which

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

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed whereas the Cross Objections of the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoor

condoned the delay in filing the Cross Objections and asked learned CIT, D.R. to proceed with her arguments on the Cross Objections. 4. Learned CIT, D.R. submitted that the Cross Objections are similar to the additional grounds of Revenue taken by the Revenue in the appeals no.630, Page 8 of 86 (UP AWAS EVAM VIKAS PARISHAD) 631 and others which

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-II, LUCKNOW, LUCKNOW vs. RAKESH KUMAR PANDEY, GONDA U.P.

In the result, the outcome of the appeals and Cross Objections are as under:

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

delay in filing of this Cross Objection is condoned; and the Cross Objection is admitted for hearing, on merits. (B) In the course of appellate proceedings in Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, (“ITAT” for short), following paper book were filed from the assessee’s side: 15 17 19 21 (B.1) Further, a consolidated synopsis, common for all the appeals

RAKESH KUMAR PANDEY,GONDA vs. DCIT/ACIT (CENTRAL)-2, LUCKNOW

In the result, the outcome of the appeals and Cross Objections are as under:

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

delay in filing of this Cross Objection is condoned; and the Cross Objection is admitted for hearing, on merits. (B) In the course of appellate proceedings in Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, (“ITAT” for short), following paper book were filed from the assessee’s side: 15 17 19 21 (B.1) Further, a consolidated synopsis, common for all the appeals

RAKESH KUMAR PANDEY,GONDA vs. DCIT/ACIT (CENTRAL)-2, LUCKNOW

In the result, the outcome of the appeals and Cross Objections are as under:

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

delay in filing of this Cross Objection is condoned; and the Cross Objection is admitted for hearing, on merits. (B) In the course of appellate proceedings in Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, (“ITAT” for short), following paper book were filed from the assessee’s side: 15 17 19 21 (B.1) Further, a consolidated synopsis, common for all the appeals