TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Tribunal Upholds Decision Rejecting Revenue's Appeal on Computer System Clearances</h1> <h3>CST, Pondicherry Versus M/s. Ambit Infotech Pvt. Ltd., </h3> CST, Pondicherry Versus M/s. Ambit Infotech Pvt. Ltd., - 2014 (302) E.L.T. 579 (Tri. - Chennai) Issues:- Appeal against Order-in Appeal No. 09/2004- Exemption under Notification No. 10/97-CEAnalysis:1. Appeal against Order-in Appeal No. 09/2004:The Revenue filed an appeal against Order-in Appeal No. 09/2004 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Chennai. The appeal was related to a demand of duty concerning clearances of computer systems made to specific institutions during a particular period. The Original authority confirmed part of the demand but dropped the rest. The Revenue appealed against the dropped demand, but the Commissioner (Appeals) rejected the appeal.2. Exemption under Notification No. 10/97-CE:The respondent claimed exemption under Notification No. 10/97-CE dated 01.03.97. The notification required a certificate from the Head of the Institution at the time of clearance, certifying that the goods are for research purposes only if the institution is registered with the Department of Scientific and Industrial Research (DSIR). The Revenue contended that the certificate produced by the respondent was from the Registrar of the University and not from DSIR, thus not meeting the notification's conditions.3. The original authority found that the supplies were for research purposes based on an Essentiality Certificate from the University Registrar. The DSIR guidelines for issuing essentiality certificates were also considered. The Tribunal noted that the notification required a certificate from the Head of the Institution for research purposes and registration with DSIR. The Revenue argued for DSIR registration, but as the institution was not challenged to be unregistered, the Tribunal upheld the University Registrar's certificate. Therefore, the Tribunal rejected the Revenue's appeal, affirming the Commissioner (Appeals)'s decision.4. The Tribunal also disposed of the cross-objection filed by the respondents. The decision was dictated and pronounced in open court, concluding the case.
TaxTMI 