9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (12) TMI 181X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... examining the controversy came to the conclusion that the amending notification should not be given retrospective effect. - Decided against the revenue. - 3 of 2011 - - - Dated:- 4-1-2012 - Sanjiv Khanna and R.V. Easwar, JJ. REPRESENTED BY : S/Shri A.S. Chandhiok, ASG with Kamal Nijhawan, Ms. Kumud Nijhawan, Jitender Kumar and Sumit Gaur, Advocates, for the Petitioner. S/Shri Pradeep K. Bakshi and Rajat Navet, Advocates, for the Respondent. [Order]. - The present appeal by Revenue under Section 130A of the Customs Act, 1962 (Act, for short) is directed against the order dated 7th July, 2010 [2010 (258) E.L.T. 435 (Tri. - Del.)] passed by the Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (for short, the Tribunal) in App ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ine. However, it is to be appreciated the exemption under S. No. 173 of Notification No. 11/97-Customs is to computer software and not to software in general and is to be interpreted strictly on its own terms. 4. Having regard to the discussion above, it is clarified that for the purposes of the exemption under S. No. 173 of Notification No. 11/97-Cus., dated 1-3-1997, computer software is to be taken to mean any representation of instructions, data, sound or image including source code and object code, recorded in a machine readable form, and capable of being manipulated or providing interactively to a user, by means of an automatic data processing machine falling under Heading 84.71. Thus, the said exemption will not cover software ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ay outside of ambit of computer software . Such a restriction prejudicial to importers of computer software cannot be given retrospective effect. In any case, this restriction, which was introduced only on 11-2-1998, did not affect the software imported by the respondents prior to that date. 6. In the said order reference is also made to several other decisions, which were challenged by way of civil appeal by the Revenue before the Supreme Court, but the appeals were dismissed. For the sake of convenience, the said paragraph is reproduced below :- The learned counsel for the respondents, on the other hand, submitted that the expression computer software was correctly interpreted by the Tribunal in BPL Mobile Communications Ltd. v. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
