TMI Blog2013 (12) TMI 209X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... OURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY] - However the time-limit for complying with the stay order is extended by another six weeks - Following decision of Rayudu Vision Media Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Central Excise, Hyderabad [2013 (12) TMI 52 - CESTAT BANGALORE] - no case for modification in the stay order. - ST/00160-00162/2012 - - - Dated:- 28-8-2013 - Pradip Kumar Das And Mathew John, JJ. Appellant : Shri N Viswanathan, Adv. Respondent : Shri K S V V Prasad, SDR PER : Mathew John The applicant has filed nine miscellaneous applications, aggrieved by Stay Order No.41372 to 41374/2013, dated 27.05.2013 in the matter of three appeals on the same issue for different periods. One set of these applications is for modification of the sa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... decision of the Bangalore Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Rayudu Vision Media Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Central Excise, Hyderabad reported in 2013 (31) S.T.R.501 (Tri.-Bang.). He argues that this point could not be argued at the time when stay petition was heard for passing the order sought to be modified. Since this is a legal argument, he prays that this point could be taken into account and the stay petition may be modified. 5. Opposing the prayer, the learned Authorised Representative for the Revenue submits that this application amounts to rising of fresh grounds and reconsideration of the stay order which may not be appropriate. On this issue, he relies on the decision of the Hon. Bombay High Court in Baron International Ltd. Vs ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... training in 2D and 3D animation, which training was imparted using computer software and computer hardware. The Bangalore Bench of the Tribunal was of the prima facie view that it was not computer training but only a vocational training conducted with the aid of computers. In the case before us, the activity relates to testing of software and is primarily connected with computer software development and hence is prima facie covered by the exclusion clause under Notification No.24/2004-ST as amended by Notf. 19/2005-ST. Therefore, prima facie, we do not find any merit in the new legal argument raised by the learned counsel. We also note that it will not be proper to make any modification of the stay order, in view of the observation of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
