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

18. It is undisputed fact that the assessee is a "Statutory Authority" which was established under the provisions of the Uttar Pradesh Planning and Development Act, 1973. In the instant case, prior to 1st April, 2003, the assessee were enjoying exemption under Section 10(20A) and Section 10(29). When these provisions were amended w.e.f. 1st April, 2003, then

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

18. It is undisputed fact that the assessee is a "Statutory Authority" which was established under the provisions of the Uttar Pradesh Planning and Development Act, 1973. In the instant case, prior to 1st April, 2003, the assessee were enjoying exemption under Section 10(20A) and Section 10(29). When these provisions were amended w.e.f. 1st April, 2003, then

SHRI HARISHANKAR SINGH & SMT. SAROJ DEVI CHARITABLE TRUST,,KUSHINAGAR vs. DCIT, RANGE - II, GORAKHPUR

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

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Raoassessment Year: 2011-12 Shri Harishankar Singh & Smt. V. Dy. Cit, Saroj Devi Charitable Trust, Range-Ii, Gorakhpur Kushinagar, U.P. Pan-Aahas7138P (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Sh. R.L. Verma, Advocate Respondent By: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 25.05.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 27.05.2022

section 69 of the Income Tax Act as an unexplained investment for purchase of land. The assessee challenged the action of the AO before the CIT(A) and contended that there was no exchange of purchase consideration as the land in question was transferred by the trustee/manager of the assessee trust without any consideration. However, the Sh. Harishankar Singh

SATYAM FOUNDATION,VARANASI vs. CIT (E),, LUCKNOW

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA no

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: N.A Satyam Foundation, The Cit(Exemption), B-38/266 Kh-3, Tulsipur, V. 5Th Floor, South Block, T.C./46V, Mahmoorganj, Upsidc Ltd., Vibhutikhand, Varanasi-221002, Uttar Gomti Nagar, Lucknow Pradesh Pan: Aakts6783J (Appellant) (Respondent)

charitable entity. Further , it was observed by ld. CIT(E) that the trust deed of the assessee does not have a clause that the beneficiaries are a section of public and not specific individuals .The ld. CIT(E) also observed that trust deed of the assessee does not have a clause that the assets/funds of the assessee will be used

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

ATMANUSANDHAN KENDRA KALYANPURI,CHANDUALI vs. CIT (E), LUCKNOW

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA no

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: N.A. Atmanusandhan Kendra The Cit(Exemption), Kalyanpuri, Baaharvani, V. 5Th Floor, South Block, T.C./46V, Paura, Chanduli-232103, Upsidc Ltd., Vibhutikhand, U.P. Gomti Nagar, Lucknow, U.P. Pan:Aapca 0369N (Appellant) (Respondent)

charitable entity. Further , it was observed by ld. CIT(E) that the constitution(MOA) of the assessee does not have a clause that the beneficiaries are a section of public and not specific individuals .The ld. CIT(E) also observed that MOA/constitution of the assessee does not have a clause that the assets/funds of the assessee will be used

ABHISHEK SEWA SANSTHA,CHANDAULI vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), LUCKNOW

Accordingly, appeal of the assessee dismissed as not maintainable

Bench: Us That Relevant Fact & Correct Position Of Law Has Not Been Considered By Ld. Pcit, Therefore Same Are Discussed In Brief.

18, in all such cases where the Audit Report for the previous year has been obtained before the filing of return of income and has been furnished subsequent to the filing of the return of income but before the date specified under section 139 of the Act is condoned. (ii) In all other cases of belated applications in filing Form

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)

18 .04.2022 O R D E R PER SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This appeal, filed by assessee, being ITA No.163/Vns/2019, is directed against an order dated 31.08.2018 in File No.CIT(Exemption) /Lko/10(23C)/ 2018-19/58/160/2018-19/5831 passed by learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Lucknow(hereinafter called "theCIT(E)") under Section 10(23C)(vi) of the Income