9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (6) TMI 824X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... declaring total income of ₹ 8,78,768/-. The return was processed u/s 143(1) and thereafter notice u/s 143(2) was issued on 7.8.2009. The assessee has been providing information technology services to foreign clients. Apart from business income from this source, it has earned dividend income in this year, which is not included in the total income u/s 10(34) and long-term capital gain, which is claimed to be not includible in the total income u/s 10(38). It has also earned interest income. 2.1 The assessee claimed the deduction of ₹ 43,11,887/- u/s 10B of the Act. In this connection, a certificate has been filed from software technology Park of India (STPI), which is valid upto 31.12.2007. The report in form No. 3CEB dated 5.9. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ly engaged in 100% export of computer software from the date of commencement of its production activities from 14th January, 2005 and has availed similar exemption in the past three years. c) The deduction claimed is within the restricted period upto 1st April, 2012. d) The production of computer software had started within the time period specified in the said section clause 10A(2)(i)(b) i.e. after 1st of April, 1994 as applicable to Software Technology Park. Registration Green Card copy was filed during the assessment and appellate stages. e) The Income Tax Return was filed on 29th August, 2008 which is within the time stipulated u/s 139(1) of the Act. f) The unit was not formed by splitting up or by reconstruction of any busi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in filing of Softex Forms has also subsequently been condoned. The green card of the appellant was not cancelled as alleged by the AO but only expired and was not renewed as the appellant did not have any further orders beyond August, 2007. Taking into account the totality of the facts of the case and the provisions of law in this regard, I am of the view that there was no justification for not allowing the exemption u/s 10B to the appellant. The disallowance made by the AO is therefore deleted. This ground of appeal is allowed. 4. Before us, Ld. Sr. DR drew our attention towards the findings of the AO and the Ld. CIT(A). It is submitted that the certificate of registration with the STPI was valid upto 31.12.2007 and not upto 31.3.2008 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e been granted u/s 10A. 5.1 It is argued that the delay in submission of Softex forms to STPI was condoned by it in letter dated 21.4.2011. There is no discrepancy in the amount mentioned in foreign inward remittance certificates (FIRC) and the turnover declared by the assessee as reconciliation in respect thereof has been furnished. It is further submitted that exemption u/s 10A and 10B are similar in nature except that approval of the Board is not required for claiming exemption u/s 10A. as held in the case of ITO vs. Vidya Tech Solutions (P) Ltd. (2010) 35 SOT 25 (Delhi). The claim of the assessee has been allowed by the revenue in earlier years in scrutiny assessments. It is also submitted that this is an incentive provision, which s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
