COMMISSIONER OF SERVICE TAX DELHI vs. QUICK HEAL TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED

In the result, the appeals are allowed

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.B. PARDIWALA

35L(b) of the Act 1944. 13. The revenue has in its memorandum of appeal formulated the following questions of law for consideration of this Court:­ 6 “(i) Whether the Tribunal is right in holding that the transaction in the present case results in the right to use the software and would amount deemed sale? (ii) Whether the Antivirus Software

COMMISSIONER OF GST AND CENTRAL EXCISE vs. M/S CITIBANK N.A

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.M. JOSEPH

35L(1)(b) of the Central Excise Act, 1944, read with Section 83 of Chapter V of the Finance Act, 1994. They are directed against the Orders dated 16.11.2018 and 20.11.2019, passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, South Zonal Bench, Chennai (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Tribunal’, for short). 1 Digitally signed by Nidhi Ahuja Date

M/S. MERCANTILE COMPANY vs. COMMNR. OF CENTRAL EXCISE, CALCUTTA

35L(b) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (hereinafter called the \021Act\022) against the final order no.1419-1420/Cal/2000 dated 31st August 2000 in appeal no. E/R-156-157/99 passed by the Customs, Excise & Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal, Eastern Bench, Calcutta (hereinafter called the Tribunal) whereby the Tribunal has dismissed the appeal filed by the appellant herein. FACTS: 2. Acting on the basis

M/S CRAFT INTERIORS PVT. LTD. vs. COMMR.OFCENTRAL EXCISE,BANGALORE

The appeals are allowed

Section 35L(b) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 against the impugned order of the Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as ‘The Tribunal’), South Zone Bench, Bangalore dated 10.5.2005. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. The appellant is a private limited company which undertakes various activities, which includes civil works, painting