INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT FUND ,CHANDIGARH vs. ACIT (EXEMPTIONS), CHANDIGARH
In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed for statistical purposes
ITA 285/CHANDI/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh07 Jun 2024AY 2017-18
Bench: Shri A.D. Jain & Dr Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 285/Chd/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Infrastructure Development Fund, Vs. The Acit बनाम Ayojna Bhawan, Exemptions, Town & Country Planning Department, Chandigarh Haryana, Plot No.3, Madhya Marg, Sector 18, Chandigarh 160018 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aaal10136K अपीलाथ" ./ Appellant ""यथ" / Respondent
For Appellant: Sh. Parikshit Aggarwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT DR
Section 12ASection 250
Trust or Commission (by whatever name called) will require similar consideration - i.e., whether it is at cost with a nominal mark-up or significantly higher, to determine if it falls within the mischief of "commercial activity".
However, in the case of such notified bodies, there is no quantified limit in Section 10(46).
Therefore, the Central Government would have