9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (1) TMI 512X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nce of the case and in law the Tribunal was justified in allowing the assessee's claim of deduction u/s 80HHE on the ground that the assessee had exported customized electronic data? (B) Whether on the facts and in the circumstance of the case and in law the Tribunal was justified in holding that similar deduction u/s 80HHE was allowed to the assessee for the earlier years whereas the assessee's claim was only for deduction u/s 80HHC in those years and the allowance of the same by the ITAT has been disputed by the department before the High Court? 2. The respondent-assessee is engaged in the business of information vending. The activities undertaken by the respondent-assessee are transmission of customized data through ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the notification dated 26.09.2000 issued by the CBDT wherein it has been specifically provided that data entry is notified as computer software service under explanation (b) to Section 80HHE of the Act. Further, the Tribunal also relied upon its order dated 05.10.2007 passed by it for the Assessment Year 2001-2002 holding that the respondent-assessee is entitled to the benefit of deduction under Section 80HHE of the said Act. 5. Mr. Chhotaray, the learned Advocate appearing in support of the appeal submits that the respondent-assessee is not providing any customized electronic data to its customer but is doing only the work of news agency. Therefore, according to him the respondent assessee is not entitled to the benefit of deduction un ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 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 respondent-assessee is entitled to the benefit of Section 80HHE of the Act as allowed by the Tribunal in the impugned order. We also find that the orders of the Tribunal for the earlier Assessment Years 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 department has taken no further action to have the dismissed appeal restored. Therefore the revenue seem to have accepted the orders of the Tribunal for the earlier and also for subsequent Assessment years. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
