https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=767259 ITAT Lucknow allowed the appeal and set aside CIT(E)'s rejection of the assessee's application for approval under section 10(23)(vi). The tribunal found that CIT(E) erred in rejecting the application without sufficient material evidence showing the assessee was not carrying out educational activities per its objects. Since the foundation was incorporated in April 2018 and applied for registration shortly after, allegations of commercial operations and profit channelization were baseless as activities had not yet commenced. The matter was remanded to CIT(E) for fresh consideration. en-us Thu, 06 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 13 Mar 2025 08:35:19 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=767259 ITAT Lucknow allowed the appeal and set aside CIT(E)'s rejection of the assessee's application for approval under section 10(23)(vi). The tribunal found that CIT(E) erred in rejecting the application without sufficient material evidence showing the assessee was not carrying out educational activities per its objects. Since the foundation was incorporated in April 2018 and applied for registration shortly after, allegations of commercial operations and profit channelization were baseless as activities had not yet commenced. The matter was remanded to CIT(E) for fresh consideration. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 06 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=767259