DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RANGE-6, LUCKNOW vs. M/S U.P RAJKIYA NIRMAN NIGAM LTD., LUCKNOW

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri. A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoorassessment Year: 2013-14 Uttar Pradesh Rajkiya Nirman V. The Dy. Cit Nigam Ltd. Range Vi Visheshwaraiya Bhawan Lucknow Vibhuti Khand, Gomti Nagar Lucknow Tan/Pan:Aaacu5701F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2013-14 The Dy. Cit V. Uttar Pradesh Rajkiya Nirman Range Vi Nigam Ltd. Lucknow Visheshwaraiya Bhawan Vibhuti Khand, Gomti Nagar Lucknow Tan/Pan: Aaacu5701F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri K. R. Rastogi, C.A. Department By: Smt. Sheela Chopra, Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing: 04 10 2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 14 12 2021 O R D E R

199 of Income Tax Act 1961. 4. Apropos the sole ground raised by the assessee relating to addition under section 43B of the Act, the ld. CIT(A), while confirming the addition of Rs.2,15,56,614/-, observed as under: “8.1 Ground of appeal no.3 – Addition of Rs.2,15,56,614/- u/s 43B: ITA No.184&218/LKW/2019 Page

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-6, LUCKNOW vs. M/S. U.P. STATE CONSTRUCTION & INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED, LUCKNOW

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

199 of the I.T. Act, 1961 the above interest income is income of the assessee and not of the U.P. Govt. The Ld.CIT(A)-2, Lucknow has erred in law and on facts in deleting the disallowance of exemption claimed u/s 10(26B) Rs.29,10,000/- without appreciating the fact that the assessee has not maintained any separate books

UTTAR PRADESH RAJKIYA NIRMAN LIMITED,LUCKNOW vs. D.C.I.T. RANGE-6 (JAO), LUCKNOW

In the result, ita No.164/LKW/2022 stands allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Nikhil Choudhary

sections 198 and 199 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called “the Act’), the interest income of Rs.33,49,65,000/- was liable to be added to the total income, as the assessee had claimed TDS relating to said interest income. The AO also disallowed

UTTAR PRADESH RAJKIYA NIRMAN LIMITED,LUCKNOW vs. THE DCIT,RANGE-6, LUCKNOW

In the result, ita No.164/LKW/2022 stands allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Nikhil Choudhary

sections 198 and 199 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called “the Act’), the interest income of Rs.33,49,65,000/- was liable to be added to the total income, as the assessee had claimed TDS relating to said interest income. The AO also disallowed

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

disallowance on account of violation of section 13(3) of the Act by the assessee in his order for the A.Y. 2015-16. He pointed out that section 13(3) of the Act demands that if any part of the income or property of the trust is used or applied directly or indirectly for the benefit of specified persons

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

disallowance on account of violation of section \n13(3) of the Act by the assessee in his order for the A.Y. 2015-16. He pointed out that section \n13(3) of the Act demands that if any part of the income or property of the trust is used or applied \ndirectly or indirectly for the benefit of specified persons

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

disallowance on account of violation of section \n13(3) of the Act by the assessee in his order for the A.Y. 2015-16. He pointed out that section \n13(3) of the Act demands that if any part of the income or property of the trust is used or applied \ndirectly or indirectly for the benefit of specified persons

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

disallowance on account of violation of section \n13(3) of the Act by the assessee in his order for the A.Y. 2015-16. He pointed out that section \n13(3) of the Act demands that if any part of the income or property of the trust is used or applied \ndirectly or indirectly for the benefit of specified persons

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

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

199 ITR 819\n(Cal), as many of the facts in that case resemble that of the assessee parishad. In\nthat case, the assessee, a public charitable trust had claimed exemption under\nsection 11 for assessment year 1984-85, including for accumulation under section\n11(2), for which purpose it had filed Form No. 10. In the said form

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

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

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudharyita Nos.181 & 182/Lkw/2024 A.Ys.2017-18 & 2018-19 Rohilkhand Educational Vs. Dcit, Charitable Trust, Bareilly Central Circle, Bareilly Pan: Aaatr6902J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assesseeby: Sh. Rakesh Garg, Adv Revenue By: Sh. S.H. Usmani, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 14.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 22.09.2025 O R D E R Per Bench: [ These Two Appeals Have Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A)-3, Lucknow Dated 19.03.2024 & 22.03.2024, Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, For The A.Ys. 2017-18 & 2018-19, Dismissing The Appeals Of The Assessee Against Orders Passed By The Assessing Officer Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. The Grounds Of Appeal Are As Under:- “(1).That The Ld. Authorities Below Have Erred In Law As Well As On Facts In Not Considering The Fact That In The Alleged Assessment Order, The Columns Of Name Of Assessee, Pan, Asst Year, Date Of Assessment & Section Under Which Passed, Are Blank. (2)That The Ld. Authorities Below Have Erred In Law As Well As On Facts In Treating The Demand As Valid Which Was Not Computed On The Basis Of Orderthat May Not Be Termed To Be An Order Under Section 143(3). (3) That A Demand Of Tax As Computed In The Computation Sheet Is Without Jurisdiction Void-Ab-Inito & Is Liable To Be Annulled. (4) That The Ld. Authorities Below Have Erred In Law As Well As On Facts In Confirming The Addition Of Rs. 736591857/-Comprising  Corpus Donation Aggregating To Rs 7,68,95,000/-, A.Ys. 2017-18 & 2018-19

199 ITR 819 (Cal), as many of the facts in that case resemble that of the assessee parishad. In A.Ys. 2017-18 & 2018-19 that case, the assessee, a public charitable trust had claimed exemption under section 11 for assessment year 1984-85, including for accumulation under section 11(2), for which purpose it had filed Form No.10

U.P SAMAJ KALYAN NIRMAN NIGAM LIMITED (NOW KNOWN AS U.P STATE CONSTRUCTION AND INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD.),LUCKNOW vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2, LUCKNOW

199 are not attracted since the interest belongs to the govt. and as such the\nTDS deducted by banks has also been shown along with the gross amount\npayable to the Govt. As such, the Corporation has considered the TDS amount\ndeducted as payable to Govt. and accordingly shown in the books of accounts in\nas much

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

199 taxman 395. He went on to submit that it had\nbeen held by the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the respondent's own case in M/s\nU.P. Awas Evam Vikas Parishad in ITA No.114 of 2010 dated 16.09.2013 that it was\nalways open to Revenue authorities to examine the claim under sections 11 and 13,\nand give such

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LUCKNOW vs. M/S U.P PROJECT CORP. LTD., LUCKNOW

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri. A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoorassessment Year: 2014-15 The Dy. Cit V. M/S U.P. Projects Corporation Ltd. Range 6 Left Bank, Gomti Barrage Lucknow Gomti Nagar, Lucknow Tan/Pan:Aaacu3393F (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Smt. Sheela Chopra, Cit (Dr) Respondent By: Shri Rakesh Garg, Advocate Date Of Hearing: 06 06 2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 04 07 2022 O R D E R

section 198 and 199 of Income Tax Act. 2. Apropos Ground no.1, the Assessing Officer noted that the assessee had been deducting profit from work-in-progress and had been crediting it to Retention Reserve. The Assessing Officer added the Retention Reserve of Rs.13,64,34,077/- to the income of the assessee, observing that the assessee, despite having been

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

199 taxman 395. He went on to submit that it had\nbeen held by the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the respondent's own case in M/s\nU.P. Awas Evam Vikas Parishad in ITA No.114 of 2010 dated 16.09.2013 that it was\nalways open to Revenue authorities to examine the claim under sections 11 and 13,\nand give such

UTTAR PRADESH RAJKIYA NIRMAN NIGAM LIMITED,LUCKNOW vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LUCKNOW

In the result, appeal filed by assessee in ITA No

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

199 of the I.T. Act, 1961. 5. The CIT(A), Lucknow has erred in law and on facts in deleting the addition of Rs.98,01,151/- on account of profit on sale of assets without appreciating die fact that though the amount has been shown in ether receipts but in computation of income the same has been deducted from income

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LUCKNOW vs. M/S U.P RAJKIYA NIRMAN NIGAM LTD., LUCKNOW

In the result, appeal filed by assessee in ITA No

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

199 of the I.T. Act, 1961. 5. The CIT(A), Lucknow has erred in law and on facts in deleting the addition of Rs.98,01,151/- on account of profit on sale of assets without appreciating die fact that though the amount has been shown in ether receipts but in computation of income the same has been deducted from income

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW vs. M/S U.P FOREST CORPORATION, LUCKNOW

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoorassessment Year:2016-17

199- 29.12.2009 Section 254 Hon'ble I.T.A.T., vide its order dated 2000 read with 16.01.2009 in ITA No 512/LUC/2007, has Section 143(3) granted registration to the assessee u/s 12A of the Income –Tax Act, 1961. The assessee vide its written reply dated 29.12.2009 has claimed that in view of the said decision of the Hon'ble I.T.A.T., its entire

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

section 11, did not consider the findings of the AO with\nrespect to section 11(2), section 13(1)(d) and section 13(3). He has pointed out that\nonce the ld. CIT(A) had held that the income of the assessee should be computed in\nthe manner specified in section 11, taking into account information given in the\naudit