9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (10) TMI 318X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... matrix, both these authorities have held in favour of assessee. There is nothing contrary either in law or on facts emerge before us to lead us state that any of these findings are perverse and as such give rise to any substantial question of law - Decided against Revenue. - TAX APPEAL NO. 599 of 2012 - - - Dated:- 25-2-2013 - AKIL KURESHI AND SONIA GOKANI , JJ. For the Appellant : Mrs. Mauna M. Bhatt. For the Respondent : B.S. Soparkar. ORDER:- PER : Ms. Sonia Gokani The Revenue has preferred this Tax Appeal, challenging the order of the ITAT, Dated 16th February, 2012, raising the following substantial question of law for our consideration, "Whether the Appellate Tribunal has substantially erred in deleting ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ill of the assessee-respondent and its employees in developing the software, that too, in a very short duration. He also had questioned the date of registration of certificate approved by the Director, Software Technology Parks of India, Gandhinagar, with respect to the export made through internet. On having failed to be convinced from contemporaneous record that software was developed by the assessee or that the same was transmitted to the foreign countries through internet, he rejected the claim of the assessee under Section 10A of the Act, treating the said transaction as a bogus and sham transaction, and therefore, the entire sum of Rs. 2,89,42,468/- had been added as an unexplained cash credit under Section 68 of the Act. 5. It appe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... us society under the Ministry of Information Technology of India, are not challenged by the Assessing Officer or the Department and when there is nothing to infer that these documents or transactions are in any manner bogus or sham and when no controverting evidence has been adduced, it concluded that the Assessing Officer was not justified in making addition under Section 68 of the Act. 7. The tribunal also concurred with all these findings of the CIT(Appeals) and concluded that that the assessee had exported the software manufactured by it and was rightly found entitled to the exemption under Section 10A of the Act. Yet, another aspect that weighed with the Tribunal is that the assessee had also offered demonstration of such software de ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
