2024 (3) TMI 994

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Appellant : Shri M. N. Bharathi , Advocate For the Respondent : Shri R. Rajaraman , Assistant Commissioner / A. R. ORDER Order : - [ Per Ms. SULEKHA BEEVI C. S. ] Brief facts are that the appellant placed a purchase order on SAP India Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore, for the supply of SAP Standard Software and also signed the End Users License Agreement (EULA) dated 26.06.2006 with SAP, India, w....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he appellant filed appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) who upheld the same. Hence this appeal. 2.1 The Ld. counsel Shri M.N. Bharathi appeared and argued for the appellant. It is submitted that in the proceedings before the Adjudicating Authority as well as before the Commissioner (Appeals), the appellant had contended that they are not the importer and therefore is not liable to pay the d....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... being revenue neutral there is no ground for invoking the extended period. So also, the issue as to whether the appellant can be considered as an importer when the software has been imported by SAP India Pvt. Ltd. was contentious and reached before the Tribunal, and for this reason, it can concluded that the issue is interpretational in nature. The Ld. counsel prayed that the demand may be set as....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... same has been held to be not tenable. The non-payment of duty would not have come to light but for the investigations conducted by DRI. Therefore, the invocation of extended period is legal and proper. The Ld. AR prayed that the appeal may be dismissed. 4. Heard both sides. 5.1 From the facts narrated above, it can be seen that the issue on merits has been decided in favour of the Revenue a....