2011 (1) TMI 1537

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....eferred by the revenue is directed against the order dated 21.12.2009 passed by the ld. CIT(A) for the Assessment Year 2006-07. 2. Briefly stated facts of the case are that the assessee is a telecom firm which is franchisee of MTNL which is supplying their telecommunication services within the building of Opera House. The assessee is a franchisee of MTNL and is responsible for installation and ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ses however, allowed the claim of the assessee. 3. Being aggrieved by the order of the ld. CIT(A) the revenue is in appeal before us. 4. Ground No.1 and 2 read as under :- "1. The ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in allowing the deduction under section 80IA(4)(ii) of the I.T. Act to the assessee treating the assessee as engaged in the business of providing Basic Telecom Serv....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....2006 order dated 27.12.2007 for the Assessment Year 2003-04 and Kansan Communications Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT in ITA No.4355/M/2002 order dated 12.9.2003 for the Assessment Year 1998-99. He also placed on record the copy of the said orders of the Tribunal. He therefore submits that the order passed by the ld. CIT(A) be upheld. 7. Having carefully heard the submissions of the rival parties and perusi....