TaxTMI Login
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Just a moment...
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the value of software supplied with telecom equipment was includible in the assessable value of the hardware for central excise duty purposes.
Analysis: The dispute turned on whether the software was merely operational or application software supplying additional functionalities, or whether it was an integral part of the telecom equipment without which the equipment could not function. The record showed that the software was separately shown in invoices and supplied in CD-ROMs, but the department contended that it was essential to the functioning of the broadband DLC system. The appellate authority's finding that the equipment could function without the software was not supported by a detailed examination of the evidence. At the same time, the material placed before the Tribunal was insufficient to conclusively determine the true nature and role of the software, and the parties could not furnish adequate technical details to resolve the controversy on merits.
Conclusion: The issue could not be finally decided on the existing record and required fresh adjudication by the original authority.
Final Conclusion: The matter was sent back for reconsideration on the software-valued inclusion question, so the appeal succeeded only to the extent of remand.
Ratio Decidendi: Where the evidentiary record is insufficient to determine whether software supplied with equipment is an independent software product or an integral component of the hardware, the assessable-value question must be decided afresh on proper technical evidence.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
