2013 (9) TMI 1044

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... tion was withdrawn in the year 2004 and the adjudicating authority in the present proceedings allowed the benefit of this Notification prior to 9-7-2004. Also, there is no evidence produced by the appellant that the major activity under the agreement is for enhancement or upgradation of software. Appeal dismissed - decided against appellant.
Shri S.S. Kang, Vice-President and P.K. Jain, Member (T) Shri Neeraj Mainkar, Advocate, for the Appellant. Shri D.D. Joshi, Superintendent (AR), for the Respondent. ORDER Heard both sides. 2. The appellant filed this appeal against the impugned order whereby a demand of Service Tax of ₹ 1,51,273/- along with interest is confirmed. 3. The demand is for the period 9-7-2004 to Octo .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... service comes into the scope of Service Tax with effect from 16-5-2008. In view of the above decision, the contention of the appellant is that the demand is not sustainable. 6. The Revenue submitted that the maintenance of software comes under the scope of maintenance or repair service which covers the maintenance or repair in relation to any goods or equipment excluding motor vehicles. The Revenue relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Tata Consultancy Services (supra) to submit that the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that software is covered under the definition of goods, therefore the maintenance and repair of goods comes under the scope of 'maintenance or repair service' as provided under Section 65(64) o .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... for the period starting from 9-7-2004. 9. Further, we find that maintenance and repair of computer or computer system were exempted from payment of Service Tax under Notification 20/2003-S.T., dated 21-8-2003 and the Notification was withdrawn in the year 2004 and the adjudicating authority in the present proceedings allowed the benefit of this Notification prior to 9-7-2004. 10. The appellant relied upon the decision of the Tribunal in the case of SAP India Pvt. Ltd. We have gone through the judgment. We find that the Tribunal after taking into consideration the terms and conditions of the agreement, held that more than 80% of the activity is in respect of upgradation and enhancement of the software. In these circumstances, the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X