9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (1) TMI 512X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ore, the activity carried out by the assessee was of transmitting customized electronic data to its client is factually so found by two authorities under the Act. This finding of fact arrived at by the authorities under the Act is not perverse and nor arbitrary so far as deduction under Section 80HHE for data entry is concerned, the same is covered by CBDT notification dated 26.09.2000 wherein the job of data entry has been notified as being computer software service. Therefore, the assessee is entitled to the benefit of Section 80HHE. Also the orders of the Tribunal for the earlier AY i.e. 1999-2000, 2000-2001, 2001-2002 and the subsequent year 2004-2005 have already been dismissed by this court for non-removal of office objections and the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssing. For the assessment year 2003-04, the respondent-assessee filed its return of income declaring an income of Rs.36.10 lacs. In its return, the assessee interalia claimed deduction under Section 80HHE of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act). The Assessing Officer disallowed the deduction claimed by the respondent-assessee on the ground that the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) for the Assessment year 200001 allowing the claim for deduction has not been accepted by the department as an appeal against the same is pending before the Tribunal. 3. In first appeal, the CIT(A) by an order dated 28.02.2006 allowed respondent-assessee's claim for deduction under Section 80 HHE of the Act. This was on the ground that the issue is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mputer software as defined in explanation (b) thereto and according to him the appellant does not satisfy the requirement. 6. On the other hand, Mr. Jasani, the learned Advocate on behalf of the respondent-assessee supports the order of the Tribunal and also points out that the Tribunal's orders for the earlier Assessment Years namely 1999-2000 and 2000-2001 and following Assessment year 2004-2005 allowing the benefit of Section 80HHE of the Act to the respondent-assessee have already been dismissed by this court for the non-removal of office objections. In the circumstances, he submits that the order of the Tribunal calls for no interference. 7. We have considered the submissions. We find that CIT(A) as well as the Tribunal has concurren ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
