9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (9) TMI 440X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... revenue that the matter should go back to the file of the AO in the present year also as has been restored back by the Tribunal in AY: 2009-10. - ITA No. 1090 (Bang) 2014 - - - Dated:- 17-6-2016 - Shri A. K. Garodia, Accountant Member And Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Judicial Member Revenue by : Dr. Shankar Prasad, JCIT Assessee by : Shri S.V.Ravi Shankar, Advocate ORDER Per Shri A. K. Garodia, AM This is revenue s appeal directed against the order of the ld. CIT(A)-I, Bangalore dated 30-05-2014 for the assessment year 2010-11. 2. In this appeal, the Revenue has raised the following grounds; l. The order of the CIT (A) is opposed to law and the facts and circumstances of the case. 2. The CIT (AY erred in followi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ppreciating that the jurisdictional High Court in the case of BAEHAL software Ltd., which in its order dated 13-2011 in ITA 136 of 2010 has held that on the facts of the case though it was satisfied that the assessee was entitled to the benefits of deduction, it has to be denied the said benefit for non-compliance to the mandatory requirement of law. 7. The CIT(A) erred in allowing the appeals of the assessee and directing the AO to allow deduction u/s 10A even though he assessee had claimed deduction u/s 10B by filing form 56G rw rule 16E without appreciating that the assessee had not furnished form 56F rw rule 16D for claim of deduction u/s 10A along with the return, but filed it before the CIT(A) and that th4re is no provision under ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 0 or the Tribunal may restore the matter back to the file of the AO for a fresh decision in the line with the same directions as were given by the Tribunal in assessee s own case for the AY: 2009-10. As against this, the ld. AR of the assessee supported the order of the ld. CIT(A). He also placed reliance on the judgment of Hon ble Karnataka High Court rendered in the case of M/s Maxim India Integrated Circuit Design Pvt.Ltd., in ITA No.465 of 2008 dated 26-07-2011,copy of which has been submitted. 4. We have considered rival submissions. We find that in the impugned order, ld. CIT(A) had re-produced para -17 to 22 of the Tribunal order in assessee s own case for the assessment year 2009-10. For the sake of ready reference, these paras o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to augment foreign exchange earnings. 18. With regard to the directory compilation and updating services , the AO has merely observed that the same is nothing but providing technical services to clients. In our view the above service going by the very nature of service will be data processing. The data received in one form is converted into another form and delivered abroad. There is certainly value addition to the data re-transmitted abroad. It is for this value addition and getting back the data in a different form that the Assessee receives remuneration. Clearly the same will be in the nature of data processing. 19. With regard to data conversion services , the AO has merely observed that converting scanned content to readab ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... view, the decision rendered by the ITAT Bangalore Bench in the case of ANSR Source India Pvt. Ltd. (supra), squarely covers the issue and the claim of the assessee should be directed to be examined in the light of the provisions of section 10A of the Act and for this purpose the report of the auditor in Form 56F of the Act filed before the CIT(A) is admitted as additional evidence. We are of the view that, in the interest of justice, the issue should be directed to be examined by the Assessing Officer afresh u/s. 10A of the Act in the light of the observations made by us in the earlier part of this order. Accordingly, we set aside the order of the CIT(Appeals) and remand the issue to the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration claim of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
