| The Tax Publishers2020 TaxPub(DT) 3842 (Karn-HC) : (2020) 428 ITR 0485 : (2020) 275 TAXMAN 0040 INCOME TAX ACT, 1961
Section 10A
Where assessee was transmitting the patent application and related data, which is stored in electronic form and therefore, such data, is customized data and was eligible for deduction under section 10A and it was pertinent to note that revenue itself had granted the benefit of deduction to the assessee in respect of assessment year 2003-04 under section 80HHE which is a pari materia to section 10A, thus, assessee was entitled to benefit of deduction under section 10A.
|
Deduction under section 10A - Eligibility of deduction under section 10A - Revenue itself granted deduction to assessee in respect of earlier assessment year -
Assessee claimed deduction under section 10A and returns of income filed by the assessee were selected for scrutiny. AO in respect of assessment years 2009-10 and 2010-11 held that section 10A applies only in respect of profit and gains derived from export of articles, or things or computer software and therefore, assessee was not entitled for deduction under section 10A activities of assessee did not constitute development of computer program as defined under section 10A. It was further held that the activities of assessee did not fall in any of the category as mentioned in Notification No. 896, dated 26-9-2010 issued by CBDT and rejected the claims of deduction of the assessee under section 10A. Held: Activities of the assessee can be classified as Data Processing, Legal Databases and remote maintenance under the Notification issued by the CBDT. Assessee was transmitting the patent application and related data, which is stored in electronic form and therefore, such data, is customized data and was eligible for deduction under section 10A. It was pertinent to note that revenue itself had granted the benefit of deduction to assessee in respect of assessment year 2003-04 under section 80HHE which is a pari materia to section 10A. Therefore, assessee was entitled to benefit of deduction under section 10A.
Followed:Santhosh Hazari v. Purushottam Tiwari', (2001) 3 SCC 179 (SC) : 2001 TaxPub(DT) 1102 (SC) CIT v. Soft Brands (P) Ltd.', (2018) 406 ITR 513 (Karn-HC) : 2018 TaxPub(DT) 3520 (Karn-HC) Kulwant Kaur S. Gurdial Singh Mann', (2001) 4 SCC 262 Vijay Kumar Talwar v. CIT (2011) 330 ITR 1 (SC) : 2011 TaxPub(DT) 0693 (SC) K. Ravindranathan Nair v. CIT', (2001) 247 ITR 178 (SC) : 2001 TaxPub(DT) 0871 (SC) Sudharshan Silks and Sarees v. CIT', (2008) 300 ITR 205 (SC) : 2008 TaxPub(DT) 2012 (SC). Relied:'Kulwant Kaur v. Gurdial Singh Mann', (2001) 4 SCC 262, CIT v. M.L. Outsourcing Services (P) Ltd', (2014) 271 CTR 553 (Del) : 2014 TaxPub(DT) 3788 (Del-HC) CIT v. M/s. Kiran Kapoor', (2015) 372 ITR 321 (Del) : 2015 TaxPub(DT) 0645 (Del-HC) CIT v. B. Suresh', (2009) 313 ITR 149 (SC) : 2009 TaxPub(DT) 1519 (SC) CIT v. Peerless Consultancy and Service (P) Ltd.', (2001) 248 ITR 178 (SC) : 2001 TaxPub(DT) 0725 (SC) CIT v. Peerless Consultancy and Services (P) Ltd.', (1990) 186 ITR 609 (Calcutta) : 1990 TaxPub(DT) 0852 (Cal-HC) Chillies Export House Limitd v. CIT', (1997) 225 ITR 814 (SC) : 1997 TaxPub(DT) 1231 (SC) CIT v. Datacon (P) Ltd.', (1985) 155 ITR 766 (Karnataka).
REFERRED :
FAVOUR : In assessee's favour
A.Y. : 2009-10 & 2010-11
IN THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
 SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT
|