2017 (7) TMI 795

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Tripathi, JJ. For the Appellant : S.S.C.,Krishna Agarwal,Praveen Kumar For the Respondent : Nishant Mishra, M. P. Devnath ORDER Heard Sri Praveen Kumar, learned counsel for the appellants and Sri Tarun Gulati and Nishant Mishra, learned counsel for the respondents. These two Central Excise Appeals are directed against the common judgment and order in original passed by the CESTAT d....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....cept the explanation for the delay to be sufficient and accordingly, we condone the delay in filing the defective appeal, more particularly when one appeal against the same very common order had been entertained and admitted. Accordingly, civil misc. delay condonation application No. 99363 of 2017 is allowed. The above appeal is held to be within time. The office may allot regular number to the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... is no dispute with regard to the applicability of Section 35 (G) and 35 (L) of the Central Excise Act in the present case. The brief facts of the case would reveal that the respondents is providing customer care service to the customers of CDMA mobile phone in India on behalf of M/s Samsung Electronics Company Ltd. Korea. This service so provided by the respondents was sought to be taxed with ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n Section 129-C (3) and (4) of the Customs Act, 1962 " which pari materia to the provision of Section 35 (L) (B) of the Central Excise Act, came up for consideration before the Supreme Court. It was held that a dispute as to the classification of goods and as to whether or not they are covered by an exemption notification relates directly and proximately to the rate of duty applicable thereto for ....