VARANASI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,VARANASEE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW

In the result appeal filed by assessee in ITA no

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

natural justice.” Assessment Year: 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 and 2014-15. M/s. Varanasi Development Authority v. ACIT,Circle-3, Varanasi,U.P. 4(i). The brief facts of the case (ay: 2011-12) arethat the assesseefiled return of income on 30.09.2011, declaring total income of Rs. Nil. The case of the assessee was selected by Revenue for framing scrutiny

VARANASI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,VARANASEE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW

In the result appeal filed by assessee in ITA no

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

natural justice.” Assessment Year: 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 and 2014-15. M/s. Varanasi Development Authority v. ACIT,Circle-3, Varanasi,U.P. 4(i). The brief facts of the case (ay: 2011-12) arethat the assesseefiled return of income on 30.09.2011, declaring total income of Rs. Nil. The case of the assessee was selected by Revenue for framing scrutiny

M/S. VARANASI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,VARANASI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , VARANASI

In the result appeal filed by assessee in ITA no

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

natural justice.” Assessment Year: 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 and 2014-15. M/s. Varanasi Development Authority v. ACIT,Circle-3, Varanasi,U.P. 4(i). The brief facts of the case (ay: 2011-12) arethat the assesseefiled return of income on 30.09.2011, declaring total income of Rs. Nil. The case of the assessee was selected by Revenue for framing scrutiny

MATH GARWA GHAT (TRUST),VARANASI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), LUCKNOW

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri. B. R. Baskaran & Shri Amit Shuklaassessment Year: N.A. Math Gadwaghat Trust V. The Cit (Exemptions) Bangla Kuti, Ramna Varanasi Varanasi Tan/Pan:Aaets8008G (Appellant) (Respondent)

natural justice. 3 That the Learned CIT erred in relying on the case laws which are distinguishable and not at all applicable to the facts of the case of the assessee while denying registration to the assessee. 4. That the observation of Learned CIT that the assessee has not incurred on charitable activities as per object mentioned in the Trust

SURYA CHARITABLE TRUST,,VARANASI vs. CIT (E), LUCKNOW

trust is very meager. 3. That the learned CIT(Exemptions) has erred in law and on facts in not granting an appropriate opportunity of hearing and has thus violated the laws of natural justice. 4. That the Learned CIT(Exemptions) erred in relying on the case laws which are distinguishable and not at all applicable to the facts

CENTRAL CHARITABLE TRUST,JAFARPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTION WARD, VARANASI

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

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalecentral Charitable Trust Vs. Income Tax Officer Jafrapur- 276001, Exemption, Uttar Pradesh. Wardayakarbhawan, Maqboolalam Road, Varanasi 221002 Uttar Pradesh Pan/Gir No. : Aabtc4875G Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Shriarvind Shukla, Advocate Respondentby : Shri A.K. Singh, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 12.04.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 12.04.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi/Cit(A)Passed U/S.250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961.The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: Central Charitable Trust “1. Because The Learned Cit(A) Has Erred In Law As Well As On Facts In Dismissing The Appeal Of The Trust Running Educational Institution Without Appreciating The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case In The Correct Perspective. 2. Because The Learned Ao As Well As The Learned Cit(A) Have Failed To Appreciate That The Assessee Is Engaged Solely In Running An Educational Institution Having Gross Receipts Below One Crore & Hence No Part Of His Receipts/Income Was Taxable By Virtue Of Clear Unambiguous Provisions Of Section 10(232)(Iiiad). 3. Because The Authorities Below Have Sought To Deny The Benefit Available To The Educational Institution By Clear Provisions Of Section 10(23C)(Iiiad) With Unrelated Provisions Of Section 11/12A When Such Sections Should Not Be Applied To The Facts Of The Case. 4. Because The Authorities Below Have Sought To Deny The Benefit Available To The Educational Institution On The Basis Of Some Inadvertent Technical Errors In Filing Return Without Appreciating The Facts Of The Case. 5. Because The Order Is Bad In Law As Well As On Facts.”

Charitable Trust based on the information available on record has confirmed the addition of corpus donations of Rs.12 Lakhs and dealt on provisions U/sec 10A/10AA of the Act for grant of exemption to the tune of Rs. 31,80,530/-, wherein ld. CIT(A) observed that the assessee having failed to substantiate that it is engaged solely in educational activities

MATH GARWA GHAT GO-SANRAKSHAN NYAS,VARANASI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), LUCKNOW

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri. B. R. Baskaran & Shri Amit Shuklaassessment Year:N.A. Math Garwa Ghat Go-Sanrakshan V. The Cit (Exemptions) Nyas Varanasi 1, Bangla Kuti, Ramna Varanasi Tan/Pan:Aaatm8624J (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Ashish Jindal & Shri V. K. Jindal Respondent By: Shri Robin Chaudhary, Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing: 25 09 2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 29 09 2023

natural justice. 3. That the Learned CIT erred in relying on the case laws which are distinguishable and not at all applicable to the facts of the case of the assessee while denying registration to the assessee. 4. That the observation of Learned CIT that the assessee has not incurred on charitable activities as per object mentioned in the Trust

GONA FOUNDATION TRUST,,ROBERTSGANJ vs. CIT (E), LUCKNOW

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

Bench: Hon’Ble Sh.Vijay Pal Rao & Hon’Ble Sh. Ramit Kocharn.A. Gona Foundation Trust, V. Cit-(Exemption), Ward-16, Akhara Mohal, Lucknow Robertsganj, Sonebhadra-231216 Pan-Aactg9390H (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Sh. K.R. Singh, Advocate Respondent By: Sh. Ramendra Kumar Vishwakarma, Cit D.R. Date Of Hearing: 26.05.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 26.05.2022

justice. 3. The ld. CIT(Exemptions) ought not have acted upon in oblivious of the facts and the records. That the appellant trust is newly constituted and required infrastructure was under construction.” 2. The learned AR of the assessee has submitted that the assessee is a newly constituted trust vide deed dated 11.12.2017. The main object of the assessee trust

GYAN PEETH TRUST,SONEBHADRA vs. CIT (E), LUCKNOW

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: N.A. Gyanpeeth Trust, The Cit(Exemption), Ternahi, Robertsganj, T.C. 46-V , Sonebhadra-222645, Up State Construction& Uttar Pradesh V. Infrastructure Development Corporation, Vibhutikhand, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow-226010, Uttar Pradesh Pan:Aabtg9961D (Appellant) (Respondent)

nature of its objects and genuineness of its activities. The ld. CIT(E) also observed that no books of accounts, vouchers etc. were produced by the assessee for verification to arrive at decision as to whether the 3 Assessment Year: N.A. GyanPeeth Trust, Sonebhadra, U.P. assessee is entitled for registration u/s 10(23C) or not. The assessee is also

SANT KACHACHA BABA LOK SEWA TRUST,,VARANASI vs. CIT (E), LUCKNOW

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

Trust, Varanasi or other corroborating evidences are brought on record to prove genuineness of its activities. The ld. CIT(E) also observed that the assessee has paid Rent of Rs. 10,000/- for financial year 2015-16 and 2016-17, but no details/lease deed/rent agreement were submitted by assessee, which raises serious concerns about misuse of funds of the assessee

MOUSAMI CHOUDHURY,VARANASI vs. DY. CIT, RANGE - 02,, VARANASI

In the result , the appeal filed the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

natural events, human conduct and public and private business, in their relation to the facts of the particular case. Illustrations *** *** (g) that evidence which could be and is not produced would, if produced, be unfavourable to the person who withholds it;” Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2010-11 Mousami Choudhury, District Varanasi v. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle

MOUSAMI CHOUDHURY,VARANASI vs. DY. CIT, RANGE - 2, VARANASI

In the result , the appeal filed the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

natural events, human conduct and public and private business, in their relation to the facts of the particular case. Illustrations *** *** (g) that evidence which could be and is not produced would, if produced, be unfavourable to the person who withholds it;” Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2010-11 Mousami Choudhury, District Varanasi v. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle

BLOSSAM HOUSE EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,VARANASI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 3(1), VARANASI

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

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Raoassessment Year: 2018-19 Blossam House Educational V. Income Tax Officer, Society, 579, Teliabagh, Church Ward-3(1), Varanasi Compound, Maldahiya, Varanasi Pan-Aaatb7686D (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Sh. Atul Choudhary, C.A. Respondent By: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 07.07.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 07.07.2022 O R D E R

nature. For the year under consideration, the assessee in its return of income declared nil income after claiming the exemption under section 11(1) of the Income Tax Act and alongwith amount of Rs. 19,90,762/- as income accumulated or set apart for application to the charitable purpose and claimed that the said set apart does not exceed