9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (8) TMI 763 - AT - Income TaxDeduction u/s 10(B)- denial of claim holding that the assessee, a firm of Advocate & Solicitors engaged in production and export of customized electronic data or legal database is not eligible for deduction - Held that - The work of the assessee i.e. compiling, editing, data processing and legal data-base is transmitted or exported from India to outside India by any means and lieu earned foreign exchange, which is eligible for deduction u/s 10B of the Act, the CIT (A) rightly allowed the claim of the assessee and we confirm the same. The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. - Decided in favour of assessee
Issues Involved:
1. Eligibility for deduction under section 10B of the Income Tax Act. 2. Definition and scope of "computer software" under section 10B. 3. Compliance with conditions for claiming deduction under section 10B. 4. Interpretation of "customized electronic data" and its applicability. 5. Validity of EOU status and compliance with EXIM Policy 2002-2007. Issue-Wise Detailed Analysis: 1. Eligibility for Deduction under Section 10B of the Income Tax Act: The primary issue is whether the assessee, a firm of Advocates and Solicitors, is eligible for deduction under section 10B of the Income Tax Act. The Assessing Officer (AO) disallowed the deduction claimed by the assessee, arguing that the firm was merely rendering client-specific legal services and not engaged in the production and export of customized electronic data or legal database. The CIT (A) reversed the AO's decision, holding that the assessee was indeed engaged in the production and export of customized electronic data, making it eligible for the deduction. 2. Definition and Scope of "Computer Software" under Section 10B: The definition of "computer software" under section 10B includes "any customized electronic data or any product or service of similar nature as may be notified by the Board." The CIT (A) and the Tribunal both found that the services provided by the assessee, which involved the transmission of customized electronic data to foreign clients, fell within this definition. The legal database used by the firm was recognized as an eligible information technology-enabled service by the CBDT notification No. S.O. 890(E) dated September 26, 2000. 3. Compliance with Conditions for Claiming Deduction under Section 10B: The AO argued that the assessee did not comply with several conditions required for claiming the deduction, such as employing staff for creating a legal database, furnishing the auditor's report under section 92E, and having the correct address for the EOU unit. The CIT (A) found that the assessee had complied with all necessary conditions, including the submission of Form 56G, realization of service charges in foreign currency, and maintaining separate books of accounts for its EOU unit. 4. Interpretation of "Customized Electronic Data" and Its Applicability: The Tribunal agreed with the CIT (A) that the term "customized electronic data" includes the legal services provided by the assessee through the use of its legal database. The Tribunal referred to various legal definitions and case laws to support this interpretation, emphasizing that the services rendered by the assessee were indeed customized and transmitted electronically, qualifying them as "computer software" under section 10B. 5. Validity of EOU Status and Compliance with EXIM Policy 2002-2007: The AO questioned the validity of the EOU status granted to the assessee, citing issues like the non-compliance with customs bonding requirements. The CIT (A) and the Tribunal found that the assessee had obtained all necessary approvals from the Development Commissioner, SEEPZ, and had complied with the EXIM Policy 2002-2007. The Tribunal also noted that customs bonding was not a mandatory requirement for the type of services provided by the assessee. Conclusion: The Tribunal upheld the CIT (A)'s decision, confirming that the assessee was eligible for deduction under section 10B of the Income Tax Act. The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeals, affirming that the legal services provided by the assessee through the use of a legal database constituted "customized electronic data" and met all conditions for the deduction. The Tribunal also emphasized the importance of interpreting the term "computer software" broadly to include diverse activities, aligning with the legislative intent to promote exports and earn foreign exchange.
|
