9911796707
TMI Blog2001 (5) TMI 373X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s and the Commissioner (Appeals) vide his order impugned before us, after examining the plea of the appellants, came to a conclusion that plea of the appellant reliance on definition of term "capital goods" under Import Export Policy could not be relied upon as use of furniture, screen panels could not directly or indirectly be for manufacture of Computer Software as without these items the Computer could function. It was further held that even if it is the position of use of furniture as special type of 'cluster arrangement' which was required for the manufacture of 'software' as pleaded, it cannot automatically mean that the furniture directly or indirectly is used for the manufacture of the software. It was difficult to concede that such ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for consumption in the manufacture or conforming to be as part of the goods manufactured, is not prescribed in the subject Notification, therefore the interpretation of the appellate authority is not correct. (d) The narrow interpretation was given by the lower authority when the words "capital goods" have not been defined the meaning applied as understood in the Import Export Policy should be given. (e) The production line arrangement for the manufacture of software requires a cluster arrangement. Software industry is manpower intensive and the coordination of the software experts is a must along with ergodynamically designed office equipment and furniture for getting optimum results. 4.&e ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... connotation. In the above view of the matter, we hold that the learned lower authority has rightly held that the appellants would not be eligible for benefit of the notification as claimed; as the goods cannot by a stretch struck of imagination be taken to be used hi the manufacture of the goods .,." and they denied the eligibility of the Notification No. 123/81-C.E. to foundation nuts and structures, etc. However, that Bench, noting that the CT-3 certificate was issued in the name of manufacturing and therefore remanded the matter back to the authority, to determine whether the liability of duty would accrue on the recipient company or the dispatching company. (c) Following this decision, we would, set aside ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
