TMI Blog2019 (11) TMI 438X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h the reasons given for the delay and did not condone the delay of 30 days which was within his power to condone. The delay in filing the appeal before the Commissioner was not deliberate and intentional and the Commissioner should have condoned the delay and should have decided the appeal on merits - the delay of 30 days in filing the appeal before the Commissioner is condoned - matter remanded back to the Commissioner (Appeals) to decide the same on merits after following the principles of natural justice. Appeal allowed by way of remand. - ST/Stay/20090/2014 in ST/20112/2014-DB - Final Order No. 20819/2019 - Dated:- 19-9-2019 - HON'BLE SHRI S.S GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND HON BLE SHRI P. ANJANI KUMAR, TECHNICAL MEMBER ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s transactions provided a right to use the software developed by them and further, such software was used for commercial exploitation; (b) since they had themselves submitted that they were charging royalty on the software through paper licenses, the same could not be treated as goods ; (c) the software licences procured by them from M/s. California Software Co. Ltd. were subsequently transferred to Digicable Network (India) Pvt. Ltd. on 03.06.2008 and they were thus liable to pay service tax even in respect of the amount received in advance on 29.04.2008. (d) That their said activity is classifiable as a service of providing right to use information technology software , which is taxable; (e) they had not discharged service tax amounti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tted that Commissioner (Appeals) has a power to condone the delay up to 30 days after he has satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient reason for not filing the appeal within a period of two months. He further submitted that the appellant filed an application seeking condonation of delay giving proper reasons for the delay but the Commissioner (Appeals) refused to condone the delay and dismissed the appeal on time-bar. He further submitted that they could not file the appeal in time because the appellants closed their business operation in Mysore and are located in Chennai and the receipt of the impugned order came to their knowledge after a fortnight when they were in the process of voluntary winding-up of the company and di ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
