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

3) read with Section 143(2) of the 1961 Act. Statutory notices under Sections 143(2)/142(1) of the 1961 Act were issued by AO from time to time. During course of assessment proceedings, the assessee appeared before AO and filed replies and details, produced books of accounts, bills andvouchers, which were test checked by AO. The solitary question

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

3) read with Section 143(2) of the 1961 Act. Statutory notices under Sections 143(2)/142(1) of the 1961 Act were issued by AO from time to time. During course of assessment proceedings, the assessee appeared before AO and filed replies and details, produced books of accounts, bills andvouchers, which were test checked by AO. The solitary question

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

2) of section 73A] or sub-section (1) [or sub-section (3)] of section 74, [or sub-section (3) of section 74A], he may furnish, within the time allowed under sub-section (1) [***], a return of loss in Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2010-11 Mousami Choudhury, District Varanasi v. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2, Varanasi the prescribed

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

2) of section 73A] or sub-section (1) [or sub-section (3)] of section 74, [or sub-section (3) of section 74A], he may furnish, within the time allowed under sub-section (1) [***], a return of loss in Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2010-11 Mousami Choudhury, District Varanasi v. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2, Varanasi the prescribed

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

SURYA SEWA SANSTHAN,AURAI vs. CIT (E),, LUCKNOW

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

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2019-20 Surya Sewa Sansthan, V. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemptions), 5Th Floor, South C/O Surya Carpet (P), Ltd., G.T. Road, Aurai, Sant Ravidas Nagar- Block T.C./46V, Upsidc Ltd 221301 Vibhuti Khand, Gomti Nagar, Pan-Aaoas1629Q Lucknow-226010 (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Sh. Ashish Bansal, Adv Respondent By: Cit-Dr (Absent) Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 06.07.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 08.07.2022 O R D E R

3. Because all the requisite ‘material’ and ‘information’ as has been placed on record (alongwith the application for registration itself conclusively went on to show that; a) the appellant trust had come into existence for charitable activities and it gave primacy to “medical relief” which falls in the category of ‘charitable purposes’ as defined in section 2

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.

3. The due date of furnishing of Report from an Accountant by persons entering into international transaction or specified domestic transaction under section 92E of the Act for the Previous Year 2020- 21, which was 31st October 2021, as extended to 30th November 2021 and 31st January 2022 by Circular No.9/2021 dated 20.05.2021 and Circular No.17/2021 dated 09.09.2021 respectively

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

2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee trust was engaged in providing asyluym/shelter to Cows and maintaining gaushalas and famine relief centres to provide proper treatment and fodder to needy stray cows. Looking into the charitable activities of the assessee-trust, the ld. CIT (Exemptions) had granted registration to the assessee under section

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

2. DIT(E) vs. Meenakshi Amma Endowment Trust (2011) 50 DTR (Karnataka HC) 243. 3. Vidyadayani Shiksha Samiti vs. CIT(ITAT Delhi) ITA No. 309/Del/2016 Order dated 14.12.17. 4. M.L. Meyyappan Charitable Trust v. DIT(E) in ITA Nos. 2073 & 2074/Mds Hc / 2010).” 3. On the other hand, learned DR has submitted that the CIT(E) has rejected the application

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.”

2. The brief facts of the case are that, the assessee is a trust and has claimed that it is undertaking charitable activities including educational activities. The assessee was registered on 05.09.2008 and has Central Charitable Trust claimed that it is complying with the objects as per the bylaws and maintaining regular books of account. The assessee has filed

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

2. During the assessment proceedings, the AO noted that the assessee trust had purchased a land for a consideration of Rs. 6,59,020/- which were not disclosed in the balance sheet of the assessee trust. Accordingly, the AO made an addition of the said amount under section 69 of the Income Tax Act as an unexplained investment for purchase

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

2) of the Explanation to section 11(1)? If so, 14067312 the details of the amount of income deemed to have been applied to charitable or religious purposes in India during the previous year 3. Amount of income accumulated or set Yes apart for application to charitable or religious purposes, to the extent it 14067312 does not exceed

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)

Section 13(3) of the 1961 Act. 3. Aggrieved, the assessee has filed an appeal with Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Varanasi Circuit Bench, Varanasi, U.P..The ld. counsel for the assessee submitted 2 Assessment Year: N.A. GyanPeeth Trust, Sonebhadra, U.P. before the Bench that the assessee has submitted part replies before ld. ITO(E), but since the notices dated

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

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

2 Assessment Year: N.A. The Springer Education Foundation, Gorakhpur v. CIT(Exemption), Lucknow tribunal, at para 1 of Appeal details , that the assessee filed an application for financial year 2017-18 (assessment year 2018-19) . This is a disputed fact. Since, the application in Form No. 56D for grant of registration u/s 10(23C)(vi) or continuance thereof , is required

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)

2 Assessment Year: N.A. Satyam Foundation v. CIT(E) CIT(E). The assessee was accorded an opportunity of being heard by ld. CIT(E) and details were called from the assessee by ld. CIT(E). The assessee furnished certain details before ld. CIT(E) . It was observed by ld. CIT(E) that the assessee’s Trust deed does not have

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)

2 Assessment Year: N.A. Atmanusandhan Kendra Kalyanpuri, Chandauli ld. CIT(E) and details were called from the assessee by ld. CIT(E). The assessee furnished certain details before ld. CIT(E) . It was observed by ld. CIT(E) that the assessee’s constitution(MOA) does not have irrevocability clause . The ld. CIT(E) also observed that the constitution