TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (9) TMI 440
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the facts and circumstances of the case. 2. The CIT"(AY erred in following the decision of the ITAT in ITA No.1504/Bang/Z013 dtd.16-4-Z014 in the assessee's own case and directing to allow deduction u/s.10A without appreciating that in the relied upon order the ITAT did not specifically allow the deduction u/s.10A but set aside the order the of the CIT(A) for the A.Y.2009-10 and remanded the issue to the AO for fresh consideration of the claim of the assessee for deduction u/s.1DA. 3. The CIT (A) erred in following the decision of the ITAT in ITA No.1504/Bang/Z013 dtd.16-4-Z014 and directing to allow deduction u/ s.10A without appreciating that the order of the ITA T has not been accepted and an appeal u/s.Z60A has be....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ion u/s 10A along with the return, but filed it before the CIT(A) and that th4re is no provision under the Act to shift the deduction from section 10B o 10A on a being found to be not eligible for the other deduction and that the conditions for allowing deductions u/s 10B and 10A stand on different footing as held by the ITAT Hyderabad in the case of VNS MARKO Technologies Pvt.Ltd., Vs DCIT (ITA No.577/Hyd/2012) 8. For these and other grounds that may be urged at the time of hearing, it is prayed that the order of the CIT(A) in so far as it relates to the above grounds may be reversed and hat of the AO may be restored. 9. The appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend or delete any of the grounds that may be urged at the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... order in assessee's own case for the assessment year 2009-10. For the sake of ready reference, these paras of the Tribunal order are reproduced below: "17. We have considered the rival submissions. A perusal of the order of assessment shows that the question whether the nature of services rendered by the assessee can be said to be 'data processing and content development' falling within the Notification issued u/s. 10A of the Act, has not been examined by the AO in the proper perspective. On the abstracting and indexing services, the AO has relied on the revenue recognition as explained in the Notes to Accounts of the assessee wherein there is a reference to sale of 'printed e-journals subscriptions'. From the same, he has conclud....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 19. With regard to 'data conversion services', the AO has merely observed that converting scanned content to readable text would be only rendering of technical services. We are of the view that the said service would be in the nature of "Content Development" as envisaged in the CBDT circular referred to in the earlier part of this order. 20. With regard to 'metadata compilation and updating services', he has merely observed that the assessee was only providing data and that would be only providing technical services. In our view the said service would fall either within the expression "Content Development" or "Data Processing" envisaged by the CBDT Circular referred to in the earlier part of this order. 21. It is cl....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ordingly, we set aside the order of the CIT(Appeals) and remand the issue to the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration claim of the Assessee for deduction u/s.10A of the Act. The Assessing Officer will decide the issue afresh after affording the assessee opportunity of being heard". 5. From the above paras of the Tribunal order in AY: 2009-10, it is seen that in that year, the matter was restored back to the file of the AO for a fresh decision regarding assessee's claim for deduction u/s 10A of the IT Act, 1961, instead of Sec.10B of the IT Act, 1961 claimed earlier. In the present year also, the entire discussion in the assessment order is regarding allowability of deduction u/s 10B of the IT Act and there was no claim before the AO....