Commissioner of C. Ex. Vs. Pyramid Software and Tech.

Commissioner of C. Ex. vs Pyramid Software and Tech.

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi Decided Mar 15, 2003

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/30315

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/30315
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Judge: S Kang, a T V.K.
Decided On: Mar 15, 2003
Subject: Right to Information

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Right to Information

Key legal issue: Right to Information

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Commissioner of C. Ex.

Respondent

Pyramid Software and Tech.

Legal References

Reported In: (2003)(156)ELT239TriDel

Excerpt

1. revenue filed these appeals against the orders passed by the commissioner (appeals) whereby the commissioner (appeals) held that the value of carry bags and ac-dc static converters is not to be included in the assessable value of automatic data processing machines manufactured by the respondents.2. when the case was called, none appeared on behalf of the respondents. the notice issued to the respondents was received back with the postal remarks 'left', therefore, the appeals are being taken up in the absence of the respondents.4. carry bags, which were supplied with every automatic data processing machine (computer), were separately mentioned in the invoice. the computers, in question, are laptops, which are carried in these bags, along with accessories of computer. as the respondents are clearing the laptops with carry bags in the course of trade, the value of carry bags is not to be included in the assessable value of the laptop computer.5. in respect of ac-dc static converters, the adjudicating authority gave a finding of fact that these are not cleared with every computer and the computer is complete without converter. as the converter is not an integral part of the computer and is used as optional accessory with the computer, the value of the converter is not includible in the assessable value of computer. the appeals are disposed of as indicated above.

Full Judgment

1. Revenue filed these appeals against the orders passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) whereby the Commissioner (Appeals) held that the value of carry bags and AC-DC static converters is not to be included in the assessable value of automatic data processing machines manufactured by the respondents.

2. When the case was called, none appeared on behalf of the respondents. The notice issued to the respondents was received back with the postal remarks 'left', therefore, the appeals are being taken up in the absence of the respondents.

4. Carry bags, which were supplied with every automatic data processing machine (computer), were separately mentioned in the invoice. The computers, in question, are laptops, which are carried in these bags, along with accessories of computer. As the respondents are clearing the laptops with carry bags in the course of trade, the value of carry bags is not to be included in the assessable value of the laptop computer.

5. In respect of AC-DC static converters, the adjudicating authority gave a finding of fact that these are not cleared with every computer and the computer is complete without converter. As the converter is not an integral part of the computer and is used as optional accessory with the computer, the value of the converter is not includible in the assessable value of computer. The appeals are disposed of as indicated above.

Same Court & Year Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delh... Same Parties Commissioner of C. Ex. vs Pyramid Software and Tech. Same Subject Right to Information Same Judge S Kang, a T V.K.