9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (4) TMI 133X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , in case the Miscellaneous Application is not allowed and the order dated 6th September, 2013 is left undisturbed then, different considerations would apply as the appeal itself would have to be considered for admission and depending on the view taken thereon, the question of grant of stay of the impugned order and recovery pursuant thereto would have to be considered. The entire exercise of considering the appeal and the stay application may be rendered useless in case, the Tribunal allows the Miscellaneous Application. In view of the fact that Miscellaneous Application is now listed on 1st April, 2016 before the Tribunal, it appears to us from the submission made before us that the disposal of the Miscellaneous Application is likely t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al contracts entered into between each of the parties before it i.e. appellant and its group companies with their suppliers of equipment including the embedded software ought to have been considered separately. It is the Applicant's case that each of these contracts are differently worded and its impact would have to be considered individually dependent upon the terms of each contract. It is also contended that the entire issue stands concluded in the applicant's favour by the decision of a coordinate Bench of the Tribunal in DDIT vs. Solid Works Corporation (51 SOT Page 34) (Mum.) as well as the decision of the Delhi High Court in DIT Vs. Ericsson A.B. (204 Taxman 192). In so far as decision of the Tribunal in Solid Works Corporati ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ting of the Miscellaneous Application before the Tribunal and it was last listed on board of the Tribunal on 18th March, 2014. At that time, the Special Counsel appearing for the Revenue sought an adjournment. It is now posted for hearing on 1st April, 2016. 4. The reason that this Court has been adjourning the present Motion from time to time is because, it appeared that the disposal of the Miscellaneous Application before the Tribunal is imminent. Therefore, this Court was of the view that it may be advisable to not invest time on the appeal and the stay application as in case the Miscellaneous Application is allowed, then the question of entertaining the appeal from the impugned order would not arise. On the other hand, in case the Mi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
