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

13 of the 1961 Act. The audit report under Section 44AB was also filed by the assessee in prescribed form No. 3CB and 3CD. The AO observed that the object of the assessee-authority as defined under Section 7 of the Uttar Pradesh Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973and as submitted by the assessee in written reply before

M/S. VARANASI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,VARANASI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), VARANASI

In the result appeal filed by assessee in ITA no

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

13 of the 1961 Act. The audit report under Section 44AB was also filed by the assessee in prescribed form No. 3CB and 3CD. The AO observed that the object of the assessee-authority as defined under Section 7 of the Uttar Pradesh Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973and as submitted by the assessee in written reply before

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

2 Assessment Year: N.A. Surya Charitable Trust, Varanasi v. CIT(Exemption), Lucknow mother of Trustee of the assessee namely Shri L K Pandey , Shri S K Pandey and Shri K K Pandey. Further, ld. CIT(E) observed that building is being constructed on said land taken on lease by the assessee, out of funds of the assessee-trust

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)

2. The brief facts are that the assessee is a charitable trust, which was formed in the year 1958 by Guru Mahant Harsevanand Chela Shri 108, Mahant Swamy Atma Vivekandand Ji Paramhans, for the welfare of the people and to provide medical facilities to the poor. Since then, it has been carrying out charitable activities as per its objects

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)

charitable purposes and allegedly exaggerated and bogus expenses were claimed. Based on material on record, the ld. CIT(E) observed that the activities of the assessee were not genuine , and it was also observed that the part of income was applied for the benefit of persons specified in Section 13(1)(c) read with Section 13

THE SPRINGER EDUCATION FOUNDATION,,GORAKHPUR vs. CIT (E), LUCKNOW

Charitable Trust, Barnala Vs CBDT (2010) 195 taxmann 88 (Punj. & Har), the issue of rejection of claim for grant of exemption for application filed after the prescribed period had been considered by Hon'ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana. The Court observed as under: "It is conceded position that the assessee-petitioner has filed the application on 23.09.2008 seeking

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

2 Assessment Year: N.A. SantKachacha Baba LokSewa Trust, Varanasi increase in the fee being levied. The ld. CIT(E) also observed that the assessee has failed to implement/ invest the same funds towards the execution of any charitable objects. The ld. CIT(E) also observed that the assessee has claimed exaggerated and mostly bogus expenses. The ld. CIT(E) also