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 submitted that the returns of the trust were being filed by one practitioner, Sh. Prabhjot Singh of Bareilly, who use to also advise on taxation matters. The communications with respect to the Trust were being sent

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 submitted that the returns of the trust were being filed by one practitioner, Sh. Prabhjot Singh of Bareilly, who use to also advise on taxation matters. The communications with respect to the Trust were being sent

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

section 80G(5) of the Act. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeals: GROUNDS IN ITA NO.751/LKW/2024: ITA Nos.751 & 750/LKW/2024 Page 2 of 6 1. That the appellant in the form of Trust is carrying charitable activities of running Old Age Shelters and Ghaushala u/s 2(15) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and has applied

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

section 80G(5) of the Act. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeals: GROUNDS IN ITA NO.751/LKW/2024: ITA Nos.751 & 750/LKW/2024 Page 2 of 6 1. That the appellant in the form of Trust is carrying charitable activities of running Old Age Shelters and Ghaushala u/s 2(15) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and has applied

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

Bench: Shri. Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

ii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and under 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

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

Bench: Shri. Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

ii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and under 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

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

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

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

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

JEEVAN JYOTI VIDHYA VIKAS SAMITI,ORAI vs. CIT EXEMPTION, LUCKNOW

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudharya.Ys. 2021-22 To 2023-24 Jeevan Jyoti Vidhya Vikas Samiti, Vs. Cit (Exemption) Gandhi Market Orai Jalaun, Orai, U.P. Pan: Aabaj2731M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: None Revenue By: Sh. R.K. Agarwal, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 01.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 13.02.2026 O R D E R Per Nikhil Choudhary, A.M.: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Ld. Cit(Exemption) Under Section 12Ab(1)(Ii)(B) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, Wherein The Ld. Cit(Exemption) Has Rejected The Application Of The Assessee For Registration Under Section 12A(1)(Ac)(Iii). The Grounds Of Appeal Are As Under:- “1- 1. That Appellant Could Not Make Compliance Of The Three Notices As Mentioned In Form-10Ad, Because The Same Was Not Served Upon Them. Accordingly, Rejection Of Application For Registration U/S 12A(1)(Ac)(Iii) Of The Act In Form-10Ab Vide Form-10Ad Is Illegal, Against The Law Of Natural Justice & Without Jurisdiction. 2. That The Appellant Reserves Right To Modify And/ Or Add Any Other Ground Or Grounds Of Appeal As The Circumstances Of The Case Might Require Or Justify.” 2. The Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Society Filed An Application On 5.04.2022 For Registration Under Section 12A(1)(Ac)(Iii) Of The Income Tax Act In Form No. 10Ab. Accordingly, Vide Letter Dated 27.08.2022, Certain Clarifications Were Sought From The Assessee But No Reply Was Filed. A Reminder Notice Was Sent On 3.10.2022 Fixing The Date Of Compliance On 10.10.2022 But The Ld. Cit(E)

ii)(B) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, wherein the ld. CIT(Exemption) has rejected the application of the assessee for registration under section 12A(1)(ac)(iii). The grounds of appeal are as under:- “1- 1. That appellant could not make compliance of the three notices as mentioned in Form-10AD, because the same was not served upon them