COMMISSIONER OF S.T., BANGALORE Vs. RELQ SOFTWARE PVT. LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is by the revenue being aggrieved by the order of the Tribunal which held that the testing and analysis of software is covered under Section 65(105)(zzi) of the Finance Act, 1994 with effect from 16 -5 -2008 and since the period in question is prior to 16 -5 -2008, the assessee's are not liable for payment of Service Tax.

(2.) THE assessee had provided the services of "Technical Inspection and Certification Services" as defined under Section 65(108) of the Finance Act, 1994. After investigation, the revenue proceeded against them on the ground that they / had evaded payment of service tax to the tune of Rs. 1,37,49,835/ - for the period from July 2003 to May 2006. Thereafter, a Show Cause Notice was issued asking them to show cause as to why services rendered by them should not be classified under the category of Technical Inspection and Certification Services covered by Section 65(108) of the Finance Act, 1994. The Assessing Officer confirmed the demand and imposed interest and penalty. Aggrieved by the same, the assessee preferred an appeal to the Tribunal contending that the services being rendered come under the category of testing and analysis of software which is covered under Section 65(105)(zzi). The Tribunal held that the services rendered by the assessee falls under the category of Technical Inspection and Certification Services and are covered under Section 65(105)(zzi) which came into effect from 16 -5 -2008. Hence, they are liable to tax from that day onwards and not prior to the said date. Aggrieved by the same, the present appeal is filed by the Revenue.

(3.) AS this appeal is filed under Section 35G of the Act, the said question falls squarely within the exception carved out in Section 35G, 'not being an order relating, among other things, to the determination of any question having a relation to the rate of duty of excise or to the value of goods for purposes of assessment', and the High Court has no jurisdiction to adjudicate the said issue, as held by this Court in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise v. M/s. Mangalore Refineries and Petro Chemicals Limited, in CEA No. 6/2007 D.D. 1 -9 -2010 [2011 (270) E.L.T. 49 (Kar.)]. The appeal lies to the Apex Court under Section 35L, which alone has exclusive jurisdiction to decide the said question.