9911796707
TMI Blog2002 (5) TMI 719X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... No. 11/97-Cus., dated 1-3-1997. 2. Shri R.D. Negi, learned SDR, submitted that the Assistant Commissioner, under Adjudication Order No. 14/98, dated 9-11-1998 denied the benefit of the Notification No. 11/97-Cus. on the ground that the Notification (Srl. No. 173) excludes software required for operation of any machine working in conjunction with an automatic data processing machine and that as per Note 5(e) to Chapter 84, machines performing specific function other than data processing machine are to be classified in the Heading appropriate to their function; that Commissioner (Appeals), however, under the impugned order, allowed the appeal filed by the Respondents following the decision in the case of BPL Mobile Communications Ltd. v. C. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y is to be considered; that at the relevant time computer software without any exclusion therefrom was fully exempted and denial of the benefit of notification on the basis of any subsequent amendment is illegal; that before amendment, term computer software covered both systems software including source code and object code as well as the application software which is to be used for specific function; that software has been defined as a totality of programmes usable on a particular kind of computer, together with the documentation associated with a computer programme such as manuals, diagrams and operating instructions (Jaico Illustrated Encyclopaedia of Technical Terms, Vol. II). She, further, submitted that the software imported by Respo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 8) E.L.T. 839 (T) = 2001 (45) RLT 1054 (CEGAT) wherein it has been held that the software for expansion of Mobile Switching Centre for telecom purposes and imported prior to 11-2-98 is entitled to benefit of the Notification 11/97 before its amendment by Notification No. 3/98-Cus.; that the appeal filed by the Revenue has been dismissed by the Supreme Court as reported in - 2002 (140) E.L.T. A90 (S.C.) = 2002 (49) RLT F7. 5. We have considered the submissions of both the sides. Serial No. 173 of Notification No. 11/97-Cus., dated 1-3-97 exempts from payment of Customs duty Compu8ter Software falling under Chapter 49 or Heading 85.24 of the Tariff. The impugned software was imported from INFO Design and Bills of Entry were filed on 20-6-9 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ews have been expressed by the Tribunal in the case of BPL Telecom Ltd. v. C.C., Cochin, 2002 (142) E.L.T. 258 (T) wherein it has been held that the amendment by Notification No. 3/98, dated 11-2-98 to Notification 11/97, is thereby effective from 11-2-98. The same could not be applied to imports made earlier to that date. 7. In the present matter, it has been mentioned by the Adjudicating Authority in the adjudication order that the different modules of software imported are for computer aided design and manufacturing . Even it is mentioned in the Memorandum of Appeal that design software includes features providing analysis of the data collected from machine used for manufacturing. The benefit of notification is sought to be denied b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
