9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (7) TMI 716X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... red with the STPI, is entitled for deduction under S.10B of the Act – thus, there is no infirmity in the order of the CIT(A) – Decided against Revenue. - ITA. No. 1497/Hyd/2012 - - - Dated:- 6-6-2014 - Shri B. Ramakotaiah And Shri Saktijit Dey,JJ. For the Petitioner : Mr. Solgy Jose T. Kottaram For the Respondent : Mr. P. Murali Mohan Rao ORDER Per B. Ramakotaiah, A.M. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 3. Learned D.R. relied on the Orders of the A.O. whereas, Ld. Counsel objected that the tax effect in this case is less than ₹ 3 lakhs and on merits covered by the Coordinate Bench decision in the case of ITO vs. M/s. Secunderabad Software Services P. Ltd., Secunderabad in ITA.No.1501/Hyd/ 2011 dated 10.04.2012. 4. We have considered the rival contentions. Revenue has preferred appeal c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Central Government under S.14 of the Industries (Development and Regulation) Act, 1951. The CIT(A) has decided this issue in favour of the assessee, and held the assessee as eligible for deduction under S.10B of the Act, following the decisions of the coordinate Benches of the Tribunal in the following cases - (a) VSN Makro Technology P. Ltd. V/s. ACIT (ITA No.1057/Hyd/2010) dated 13.1.2011, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s Bench of the Tribunal, including the Benches at Hyderabad, in similar matters, we hold that the assessee, having been registered with the STPI, is entitled for deduction under S.10B of the Act. In that view of the matter, we find no infirmity in the impugned order of the CIT(A), which is accordingly confirmed and the grounds of the Revenue are rejected . 5. Ld. CIT(A) order is in consonance w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
