TMI Blog2015 (11) TMI 1897X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 39;s own case for the assessment year 2008-09 [ 2014 (9) TMI 45 - ITAT BANGALORE ] wherein as seen that the assessee satisfies the twin conditions of export of computer software and repatriation of exports proceeds in convertible foreign exchange as prescribed in section 10A of the Act. We, therefore, concur with the finding of the learned CIT (A) that the assessee is entitled for deduction u/s.10A. Disallowance of deduction u/s 80JJAA - assessee is not involved in telecom services and such services cannot be termed as IT enabled services - CIT(A) deleted addition - HELD THAT:- As decided in assessee own case as the facts of the assessee in the case on hand are similar to the facts of the above cited case of Texas Instruments India P. Ltd. [ 2006 (12) TMI 405 - ITAT BANGALORE ] deduction u/s.80JJAA of the Act is allowed on the basis of the following facts :- i) The business of the assessee falls within the definition of the term industrial undertaking ; ii) The assessee is engaged in providing Information Technology enabled services (computer software); iii) The assessee has claimed deduction of only those payments made to 'workmen' who are not employed in supervis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ompany duly incorporated under the provisions of Companies Act which is engaged in the business of developing computer software services. The return of income for the assessment year 2009-10 was filed on 30/09/2009 declaring a total income of ₹ 69,04,43,026/-. After processing the said return of income under the provision of sec. 143(1) of the Act, the case was selected for scrutiny under CASS. The assessment was completed u/s 143(2) of the Act vide order dated 20/3/2013 by the Dy.CIT declaring a total income of ₹ 79,77,30,334/-. While doing so, the AO had allowed the depreciation in respect of telecommunication equipment at 15% as against 60% claimed by the respondent assessee company. Further the AO disallowed the deduction u/s 10A on the ground that the respondent assessee is not engaged in the business of manufacture of 'any article or thing' and also disallowed the deduction claimed u/s 80JJAA of the Act. 4. Being aggrieved, the appeal was filed before the CIT(A) who vide impugned order allowed the appeal following the order of the Hon'ble ITAT in the respondent assessee's own case. 5. Being aggrieved, Revenue is before us with the present app ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ne the activities of the assessee. It is seen that the assessee is engaged in the business of mobile value added services, which involve 'content development' in its STP unit. It is seen that the assessee has a dedicated studio in its STP unit where music related content is developed. The assessee also procures music and other content from third parties. The music content developed in - house and procured by the assessee is processed to a customized format to make it compatible for deployment. The assessee also develops its own content (viz. music ring tones, caller tunes, etc.) in its studio. The assessee also uses its studios for the content development. The studio of the assessee is equipped with dedicated computer systems loaded with the required software. The assessee also uses multiple softwares like Protocols v 7.4, M-Powered, Adobe Audition, etc. The assessee also uses other advanced equipments which includes several hardware and systems like Sound Cards, Monitors, MIDI Controllers, Microphones, etc. which are used for development of content. These equipments, both hardware and software systems, are used for processing before it is made available for use by the cust ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l of this list shows that the assessee had claimed deduction in respect of employees, who had joined as engineers in their respective field such as systems engineer, test engineer, software design engineer, IC design engineer, lead engineer etc. A cursory perusal of those lists establishes that the assessee had claimed deduction in respect of the engineers employed not in the category of supervisory control. All these details were filed before the Assessing Officer during assessment proceedings. These facts were not properly considered by the Assessing Officer. Further, from the order of the CIT(A), it is seen that he had taken note of the notification issued by the Government of Karnataka and concluded that as per the notification issued, the assessee company engaged in the development of software is covered by the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. Further it is not the case of the revenue that the assessee did not fulfill the conditions extracted elsewhere in this order. Considering all those factual matters we do not find any infirmity in the order of CIT(A) according relief to the assessee. In fact he had clarified the relevant portions related to Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
