w w w . L a w y e r S e r v i c e s . i n



Consim Info Pvt. Ltd V/S Commissioner of GST & Central Excise, Chennai South


Company & Directors' Information:- INFO INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U72200TG1999PTC032271

Company & Directors' Information:- GST PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U27104MH2002PTC136410

Company & Directors' Information:- INFO-G PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U72900TZ2017PTC028694

    ST/Misc./41100/2017 and ST/551/2010 (Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No. 89/2010 (MST) dated 30.4.2010 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Chennai) and Final Order No. 42186/2018

    Decided On, 23 July 2018

    At, Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal South Zonal Bench At Chennai

    By, THE HONORABLE JUSTICE: SULEKHA BEEVI C.S.
    By, MEMBER AND THE HONORABLE JUSTICE: MADHU MOHAN DAMODHAR
    By, MEMBER

    For Petitioner: Akhil Suresh, Advocate And For Respondents: S. Govindarajan, AC (AR)



Judgment Text


1. Brief facts are that the appellant is a private limited company having branches all over India and are providing matrimonial services through online information on website, providing private employment exchange for employers and job seekers to find the candidates and jobs respectively. They are also aiding property transactions in the websites by creating a common meeting ground for those dealing in real estate business and providing information on buying and selling of automobiles. For all these services, they had registration under the category of Advertisement Services. During the course of audit by the departmental officers, it was noticed that during 2005 - 06, appellant had outsourced their matrimony activity to other associate centers and had entered into franchise agreement with these associate centers. These associate centers are identified by the trademark 'Bharatmatrimony.com'. The appellant had given representational right as well as right to use trademark to these associate centers. They collect license fee from these franchisee as per the agreement. Such collection includes non-refundable deposit and subsequent collection of royalties. According to department, the said activity was classifiable under 'franchise service' which is brought into service tax net with effect from 1.7.2003. The appellants were not discharging service tax on such activity for which show cause notice was issued raising allegations and also demanding service tax for the period January 2006 to March 2007. After due process of law, the original authority confirmed the demand and dropped the penalty under section 76 of the Finance Act, 1994, however, confirmed the penalty under section 78 of the said Act. In appeal, Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the same. Hence this appeal.

2. On behalf of the appellant, ld. counsel Shri Akhil Suresh appeared and argued the matter. He adverted to the agreement entered into by the appellant with their associate centers and submitted that the agreement is mere granting of right to use the trademark of appellant company. As per the definition of franchise service, as it stood prior to 16.6.2005, there was specific condition and characteristics in order to classify the services under franchise service. After the introduction of Intellectual Property Service from 10.9.2004, the definition of franchise service underwent a change with effect from 16.6.2005 covering only those services of granting representative right to use the process identified with trademark, logo or symbol. Thus from 10.9.2004, difference has been drawn, through Intellectual Property Service were temporarily right is granted to use all intangible properties like trademark, technical know-how etc. He argued that as per the agreement, it is transfer of intellectual property right and would not fall under Franchise Service. It can be seen that promotional materials are to be supplied by franchisor and training facilities has to be arranged by franchisor which go beyond the scope of franchise service as amended from 16.6.2005. So also clause 6 of the agreement stipulates service obligations on the part of franchisee. Clause 45 stipulates obligations on the part of franchisor. These obligations are beyond the scope of definition of franchise service and thus the activities cannot fall within the definition. He submitted that the essentials of franchise agreement is not fulfilled in the instant case and does not make the activity a taxable service under this category. He placed reliance in Ashok Enterprises reported in 2007 (5) STR 153 (Commr. Appl.) which held that where agreements are lacking concept business operation, managerial expertise and market techniques of franchisor to be followed by franchisee, then the agreement grants limited use of intellectual property of trademark and would be covered under Intellectual Property service. Thus, the ld. counsel has argued that the services would not fall under franchise service but would be more akin to Intellectual Property service.

3. In addition, it was submitted that the demand cannot sustain as the show cause notice has been issued invoking the extended period alleging suppression of facts. That the appellant has not suppressed any facts. In fact, an internal audit was conducted in 2006 wherein the agreement was scrutinized by the officers during the course of audit and there was no objection raised with regard to the said agreement to be taxable under franchise service. Subsequently, in September 2007, another internal audit took place and the department has scrutinized the agreement, balance sheet and profit and loss account and thereafter has raised the demand invoking the extended period of limitation. In the alternative, he prayed that in any case, since the appellant was under bonafide belief that the said activity does not fall under franchise service and the department having not raised any objection in the audit conducted in 2006, he prayed that the penalties may be set aside.

4. The ld. AR Shri S. Govindarajan supported the findings in the impugned order. He adverted to the various conditions in the agreement and argued that the agreement falls within the definition of franchise service as amended with effect from 16.6.2005. Merely because the appellants have given the right to use the logo/symbol, which is Bharatmatrimony.com, it cannot be said that the agreement is for transfer of intellectual property service. The agreement shows that the franchisor agreed to the franchisee to establish and administer bharatmatrimony.com center for providing a matrimony service in the name of franchisor. Further, there is a fee charged by the franchisor in the name of royalty upon the franchisee for continuous use of the name together with the past and present goodwill of the franchisor along with minimum support service like design of marketing know-how, technical know-how etc. That these would clearly show that it is not an agreement for transfer of intellectual property but an agreement for franchise service. With regard to limitation, he submitted that the appellant have suppressed the activity of rendering franchise service, with intent to evade payment of service, the show cause notice issued invoking the extended period is proper.

5. Heard both sides.

6. The main ground that has been argued by the ld. counsel is that the activity does not fall under franchise service and that it would more rightly be classified under transfer of intellectual property service. We have perused the agreement dated 4.9.2006 furnished by the ld. counsel for appellant. The recital of the agreement in the first paragraph itself states that the appellant (formerly Bharatmatrimony.com) is referred as a franchisor and the associate member with whom the agreement is entered is referred to as the franchisee. The first clause is reproduced as under for better appreciation:-

"WHEREAS Franchisor is engaged, amongst other activities, in the business of providing matrimony services and has developed business plans and procedures relating to the promotion and operation of the said centers etc. for providing the above mentioned matrimony and internet based services.

WHEREAS as the result of the expenditure of time, effort and money, FRANCHISOR has acquired unique experience, special skills, technique and knowledge with reference to the development, opening and operating of various Bharat Matrimony Centers throughout the country. The FRANCHISEE acknowledges that he does not presently know the special skills, techniques or business policies, nor does the FRANCHISEE have business forms or access to the FRANCHISOR'S body of knowledge'

7. The above would show that it is not an agreement for mere transfer of intellectual property. In fact, the franchise agreement stipulates for payment of franchise fee charged by the franchisor upon the franchisee. The argument of the ld. counsel that it involves only transfer of intellectual property cannot be accepted for the reason that the agreement involves conditions wherein the manner of functioning and operation of the associate center is laid down. Thus the franchisor has a right to dictate or direct how the franchisee has to carry on the business. There is also a condition for the franchisee to attend the training conducted by them. Clause 5.3 states that the administration of centre shall be by the Centre Manager, the counselors etc. This shows that the franchisor issues guidelines to the franchisee as to how the business has to run, how the staff and employees have to be recruited etc. After going through the agreement, we are convinced that the agreement is a franchise agreement. For the same reason, we hold that the demand sustains on merits.

8. The ld. counsel has argued on the ground of limitation. It is his case that there was an audit in the office of the appellant in 2006 whereupon the agreement was scrutinized by the officers and that they had no

Please Login To View The Full Judgment!

objection. The mere fact that audit was conducted cannot be a ground to contend that the extended period cannot be invoked. Further, in the present case, show cause notice is issued on 14.3.2008 for the period January 2006 to March 2007. The appellants have not disclosed in the ST-3 returns that they were engaged in franchise service. For all these reasons, we are not able to accept the contention of the appellant that the demand cannot sustain on the ground of limitation. However, taking note of the fact that the audit had occasion to see the agreement in 2006, we are of the view that the penalties are unwarranted and requires to be set aside, which we hereby do. 9. From the above discussions, we hold that the impugned order is modified to the extent of setting aside the penalties only without disturbing the demand or interest thereof. The appeal is partly allowed in the above terms. 10. The miscellaneous application filed by Revenue for change of cause title is allowed.
O R







Judgements of Similar Parties

14-08-2020 P.P. Suresh Kumar, Managing Director, Kerala Communications Cable Ltd., Kochi & Another Versus The Deputy Director, Directorate General of GST Intelligence (DGGI), Thiruvananthapuram & Others High Court of Kerala
05-08-2020 Doosan Infracore India Private Limited, Rep., by N. Krishnakumar Versus The Assistant Commissioner, Office of the Commissioner of GST and Central Excise, Chennai High Court of Judicature at Madras
04-08-2020 The Commissioner of GST & Central Excise, Chennai South Commissinerate, Chennai Versus M/s. Saksoft Ltd., Perungudi, Chennai High Court of Judicature at Madras
03-07-2020 Subhash Joshi & Another Versus Director General of GST Intelligence (DGGI) & Others High Court of Madhya Pradesh Bench at Indore
26-06-2020 U. Manikandan, Mani Poultry Farm, Annamooli, Palakkad Versus The Assistant Commissioner of State Tax, State GST Department, Special Circle, Palakkad & Another High Court of Kerala
10-03-2020 The Commissioner of GST & Central Excise, Chennai Outer, Chennai V/S The Glovis India Private Limited, F-98, Kancheepuram High Court of Judicature at Madras
21-02-2020 M/s. Hwashin Automative India Pvt. Ltd., Sriperumbudur Versus The Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise, Poonamallee Division, (Not known as the Assistant Commissioner of GST & Central Excise, Irungattukottai Division), Chennai High Court of Judicature at Madras
17-02-2020 M/s. Carenow Medical Prviate Limited, Rep. by its Director & the auth. Rep.T.Rajkumar Versus Rajesh Sodhi, The Principal Commissioner of GST & Central Excise, Coimbatore High Court of Judicature at Madras
03-02-2020 M/s. Phoenix Rubbers, Palakkad, Represented By Sakkeer Hussain, Managing Partner Versus The Commercial Tax Officer, State GST Department, Palakkad & Others High Court of Kerala
03-02-2020 Sutherland Mortgage Services INC, Cochin, Represented by Achutarama Gupta Nesthala Vizupu, Authorized Signatory, V.K. Gupta Versus The Principal Commissioner, Office of The Principal Commissioner of Customs, Central GST & Central Excise, Kochi Commissionerate & Others High Court of Kerala
21-01-2020 M/s. Samrajyaa and Company, Represented by its Partner N. Ranganayaki Versus Deputy Commissioner of GST & Central Excise, Office of the Principal Commissioner of GST & Central Excise, Coimbatore High Court of Judicature at Madras
13-01-2020 Congruent Info-tech Pvt. Ltd., Thiruvanmiyur, Chennai, Rep. by its Director, Shaileshkumar Limaye Versus The Regional Director, Southern Region, Ministry of Company Affairs, Chennai & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
09-01-2020 ASL Builders Private Limited V/S Commissioner of Central GST & CX, Jamshedpur Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal East Zonal Bench Bench, Kolkata
06-01-2020 Asutosh & Another Versus Commercial Taxes Department (GST) & Others High Court of Madhya Pradesh Bench at Indore
22-11-2019 BGR Energy Systems Limited, Represented by its Assistant Vice President Accounts, Chennai Versus The Additional Commissioner of GST & Central Excise, Office of the Principal Commissioner of CGST & Central Excise, Nungambakkam, Chennai & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
20-08-2019 M/s. Alkraft Thermotechnologies (Pvt.) Ltd., Ambattur Industrial Estate, Chennai, Rep. by Authorised Signatory, P. Sirajudeen Versus Commissioner of Central GST & Central Excise, Chennai High Court of Judicature at Madras
08-08-2019 Vinod Bhatla Versus M/s. Matrimony.com (Previously known as Consim Info Private Ltd.,), Chennai & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
07-08-2019 The Commissioner of GST & Central Excise, Chennai Outer Commissionerate Versus Intimate Fashions India (P) Ltd., Guduvancherry High Court of Judicature at Madras
24-07-2019 M/s. Premier Cotton Textiles, represented by its Senior Manager, S. Vaidyanathan, Poolankinar Post, Udumalpet Versus The Commissioner of Central Goods & Service Tax, Coimbatore Commissionerate, GST Bhavan, Coimbatore & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
10-07-2019 Alkem Laboratories Ltd V/S Commissioner of GST And Central Excise, Daman High Court of Judicature at Bombay
04-07-2019 M/s. Ashok Leyland Ltd., (Formerly ‘M/s. Hinduja Foundries Ltd.'), Versus The Commissioner of G.S.T. & Central Excise, Chennai Customs Excise amp Service Tax Appellate Tribunal South Zonal Bench At Chennai
20-06-2019 The Commissioner of Central Excise, Now known as The Commissioner of GST & Central Excise, Trichirapalli Versus M/s. Madras Cements Ltd., Ariyalur High Court of Judicature at Madras
19-06-2019 M/s. Sowmiya Spinners (P) Ltd., Coimbatore Versus The Superintendent, Office of the Superintendent of GST & Central Excise, Coimbatore District High Court of Judicature at Madras
17-05-2019 M/s. Brandavan Food Products (A company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956), Chhattisgarh & Others Versus Commissioner (Appeals), Central & State Goods and Service Tax Raipur Commissionerate Central GST Building, Chhattisgarh & Another High Court of Chhattisgarh
13-05-2019 M/s. Rane Brake Lining Ltd. Versus The Commissioner of G.S.T. & Central Excise Customs Excise amp Service Tax Appellate Tribunal South Zonal Bench At Chennai
07-05-2019 M/s. Shell India Markets Pvt. Ltd. Versus The Commissioner of G.S.T. & Central Excise Customs Excise amp Service Tax Appellate Tribunal South Zonal Bench At Chennai
16-04-2019 M/s. Vendhar Movies, Represented by its Proprietor S. Madhan, Chennai & Others Versus The Joint Director, O/o. The Directorate General of GST Intelligence, Chennai & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
04-04-2019 M/s. Paripooranam Steel Traders, Chennai Versus The Assistant Commissioner of GST & Central Excise, Chennai High Court of Judicature at Madras
03-04-2019 M/S. Zentech Off-Shore Engineering Pvt. Ltd. Appellant Versus Commissioner of GST & CE, Chennai South Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal South Zonal Bench At Chennai
19-03-2019 CE Info Systems Pvt. Ltd. & Another Versus Gas Authority of India Ltd. High Court of Delhi
15-03-2019 M/s. Popular Maruthi Painting Works, Chennai Versus The Additional Commissioner of GST & Central Excise, Chennai South Commissionerate, Chennai & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
08-03-2019 M/s. Sri Ram Company Versus Commissioner of GST & CE, Madurai Customs Excise amp Service Tax Appellate Tribunal South Zonal Bench At Chennai
05-03-2019 Shivangi Polysacks Pvt. Ltd. Versus CCE & GST, Jaipur (Rajasthan) Customs Excise amp Service Tax Appellate Tribunal Principal Bench New Delhi
04-03-2019 Commissioner of GST & Central Excise, Chennai & Another Versus M/s. Updater Services P. Ltd. & Another Customs Excise amp Service Tax Appellate Tribunal South Zonal Bench At Chennai
12-02-2019 Vimal Nayan & Others Versus The Principal Commissioner of GST & Central Excise, Headquarters Preventive Unit, Chennai North Commissionerate, Nungambakkam, Chennai & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
05-02-2019 Shri Tirupathi Kumar Khemka Versus The Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise & GST, Chennai & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
29-01-2019 P. Prabhakar Versus Commissioner of GST & Central Excise Government of India High Court of Judicature at Madras
28-01-2019 World Class Management Service Versus Commissioner of GST & CE Chennai South Commissionerate Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal South Zonal Bench At Chennai
06-12-2018 Kun Motor Co. Pvt. Ltd., Puducherry, Represented by Collin Elson, Sales Manager & Another Versus The Asst. State Tax Officer, Kerala State GST Department, Thiruvananthapuram & Another High Court of Kerala
22-11-2018 M/s. TMT. Granites (Pvt) Ltd. Palakkad, Represented by Its Managing Director, Tom George Versus The Commissioner, State GST Department, Trivandrum & Others High Court of Kerala
14-11-2018 M/s. Suryadev Alloys & Power Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of GST & Central Excise Chennai Outer Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal South Zonal Bench At Chennai
14-11-2018 Reliance Cable Industries Versus Commissioner of GST (East) Delhi High Court of Delhi
13-11-2018 Principal Commr. of Central Tax, GST, Delhi Versus Pymen Cable (India) High Court of Delhi
09-11-2018 M/s. SRF Ltd., Manali Versus The Commissioner of G.S.T. & Central Excise, Chennai North Commissionerate Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal South Zonal Bench At Chennai
04-10-2018 City Union Bank Ltd. Versus Commissioner of GST & Central Excise, Trichy Customs Excise amp Service Tax Appellate Tribunal South Zonal Bench At Chennai
12-09-2018 Commissioner of GST & Central Excise Chennai Versus M/s. Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd. Customs Excise amp Service Tax Appellate Tribunal South Zonal Bench At Chennai
10-09-2018 Commissioner of GST & Central Excise Versus Dymos India Automotive Private Limited High Court of Judicature at Madras
24-07-2018 Maxworth Plywood Pvt. Ltd V/S CCT, Visakhapatnam - G.S.T. Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal Regional Bench Hyderabad
24-07-2018 Andhra Organics Ltd V/S CCT, Visakhapatnam - G.S.T. Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal Regional Bench Hyderabad
24-07-2018 Vijay Prestressed Products Pvt. Ltd V/S CCT, Visakhapatnam - G.S.T. Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal Regional Bench, Allahabad
13-07-2018 M/s. Leo Oils & Lubricants Versus Commissioner of GST & Central Excise Chennai North Commissionerate Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal South Zonal Bench At Chennai
13-07-2018 Alkraft Thermo Technologies Pvt. Ltd V/S Commissioner of GST & Central Excise Chennai North Commissionerate Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal South Zonal Bench At Chennai
13-07-2018 Terex India Pvt. Ltd V/S The Commissioner of G.S.T. & C.E., Salem Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal South Zonal Bench At Chennai
11-07-2018 Anuradha Sharma V/S Commissioner (Appeals), Customs GST and Central Excise, Lucknow Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal Regional Bench Allahabad
10-07-2018 M/s. K. Bit Brave Sourcing Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of GST & Central Excise Chennai Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal South Zonal Bench At Chennai
09-07-2018 Alkraft Thermotechnologies Pvt. Ltd V/S Commissioner of GST & Central Excise, Chennai North Commissionerate Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal South Zonal Bench At Chennai
09-07-2018 Alkraft Thermotechnologies Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of GST & Central Excise, Chennai North Commissionerate Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal South Zonal Bench At Chennai
03-07-2018 Yona Smelters Pvt. Ltd V/S CCT, Visakhapatnam G.S.T. Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal Regional Bench Hyderabad
03-07-2018 Sparsha Logistics V/S CCT, Hyderabad G.S.T. Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal Regional Bench Hyderabad
02-07-2018 Kasturi & Sons Ltd V/S Principal Commissioner of GST & Central Excise, Chennai North Commissionerate Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal South Zonal Bench At Chennai
02-07-2018 Wipro Enterprises Ltd V/S The Commissioner of Customs, Central Excise & Service Tax, Tirupati-GST Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal Regional Bench, Hyderabad
28-06-2018 Sentini Ceramica Pvt. Ltd V/S CCT, Guntur GST Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal Regional Bench Hyderabad
20-06-2018 M/s. Deccan Park Resorts Versus Commissioner of GST & Central Excise, Coimbatore Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal South Zonal Bench At Chennai
18-06-2018 The Joint Commissioner of GST & Central Excise, Office of the Commissioner of GST & Central Excise, Trichy & Another Versus M/s. Cheran Cements Limited (DEFUNCT) Rep by its Authorized Signatory ? G. Duraisamy, Karur Before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court
11-06-2018 M/s. Info Trellis India Pvt.Ltd, Rep by its Authorised Signatory & Director, Chennai Versus Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner, Employees' Provident Fund Organisation, Chennai High Court of Judicature at Madras
05-06-2018 Chennai Ferrous Industries Ltd V/S Commissioner of GST & CCE (Chennai Outer Commissionerate) Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal South Zonal Bench At Chennai
04-06-2018 Hetero Labs. Limited V/S CCT, Hyderabad GST Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal Regional Bench Hyderabad
04-06-2018 HCL Infosystems Ltd. Unit - III V/S Commissioner of GST & CCE, Pondicherry Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal South Zonal Bench At Chennai
21-05-2018 Mane India Private Limited V/S Commissioner of Central Tax, Central Excise & Service Tax, Medchal - GST Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal Regional Bench Hyderabad
17-05-2018 Voith Turbo Private Limited V/S CCT, Secunderabad GST Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal Regional Bench Hyderabad
15-05-2018 Lakshmi Machine Works Ltd. V/S GST, CCE, Coimbatore Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal South Zonal Bench At Chennai
15-05-2018 M/s. Kairali Granites, Represented by Its Proprietor, V.R Narayanan Embran Versus The Asst. State Tax Officer, State GST Department, Palakkad & Another High Court of Kerala
15-05-2018 Kohinoor Printers Pvt. Ltd. V/S GST & CCE, Chennai Outer Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal South Zonal Bench At Chennai
14-05-2018 Aditya Polysacks Pvt. Ltd V/S Commissioner of Centre Excise & GST, Jaipur Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal Principal Bench New Delhi
11-05-2018 Pioneer Hi Bred Private Limited V/S CCT, CE & ST, Medchal GST Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal Regional Bench Hyderabad
09-05-2018 Qube Cinema Technologies Pvt. Ltd V/S GST & CCE, Chennai North Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal South Zonal Bench At Chennai
09-05-2018 M/s. Qube Cinema Technologies Pvt. Ltd. Versus GST & CCE, Chennai North Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal South Zonal Bench At Chennai
08-05-2018 R.N. Metal (India) Pvt. Limited and Others V/S CCE & GST, Jaipur Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal New Delhi
20-04-2018 Holtec Asia P. Ltd V/S Commissioner of Central Excise, GST Pune-I Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal West Zonal Bench At Mumbai
12-03-2018 Venkateswara Rao Bolla & Another Versus The Senior Intelligence Officer, Directorate General of GST Intelligence Rep. by Spl. Public Prosecutor In the High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad
06-03-2018 Wheels Tourists Operator V/S Commissioner of GST & Central Excise, Chennai South Commissionerate Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal South Zonal Bench At Chennai
20-02-2018 Commr. of GST, Mumbai Central V/S Everstone Capital Advisors Pvt. Ltd. Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal West Zonal Bench At Mumbai
19-02-2018 Poornam Info Vision Versus Commissioner of Central Tax & Central Excise, Cochin Customs Excise amp Service Tax Appellate Tribunal South Zonal Bench At Bangalore
16-02-2018 Radiant Info Systems Limited, Represented by its Authorised Signatory Mallikarjun Prasad Versus The Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation, Represented By Its Managing Director High Court of Karnataka
08-02-2018 Shreyas Stocks (P.) Ltd V/S Commissioner of GST & Central Excise, Chennai Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal South Zonal Bench At Chennai
01-02-2018 M/s. Chemplast Sanmar Ltd. Versus Commissioner, GST & Central Excise, Puducherry Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal South Zonal Bench At Chennai
24-01-2018 INFO Edge (India) Ltd. Versus Akash Deep & Others High Court of Delhi
23-01-2018 V. Sridhar Versus The Authorized Officer Indian Bank, Guindy Branch GST Road, Guindy Chennai High Court of Judicature at Madras
18-01-2018 Neyveli Lignite Corporation Ltd V/S Commissioner of GST & Central Excise, Trichy Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal South Zonal Bench At Chennai
16-01-2018 Tidel Park Ltd V/S Commissioner of GST & Central Excise, Chennai South Commissionerate Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal South Zonal Bench At Chennai
01-11-2017 National Aviation Co. of India Ltd V/S Commissioner of GST & Central Excise, Chennai South Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal South Zonal Bench At Chennai
14-09-2017 M/S. Manvish Info Solutions Private Ltd., Aluva, Represented by Managing Director, Mohanan Thampuran Versus Employees Provident Fund Organization, Represented By Employees Provident Fund Commissioner, Sub Regional Office, Kaloor & Another High Court of Kerala
23-06-2017 M/s. Mahaveer Infoway Limited Rep. by its Director Ashok Kumar Jain & Another Versus M/s. Tech Minfy Info Solutions LLP, Rep. by its Partner Anand Tirumani & Others In the High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad
19-12-2016 M/s. CMS Info Systems Limited a Company Versus The Union of India Ministry of Finance & Others High Court of Judicature at Bombay
28-05-2015 In Re: Rooster Info. Pvt. Ltd. Versus Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. Competition Commission of India
18-12-2014 M/s. Shivani Info Tech, Partnership Firm, rep. by B. Sheji (Partner) & Others Versus Authorised Officer, Karur Vysya Bank, Coimbatore High Court of Judicature at Madras
14-08-2014 Spread Info Tech Consultants Pvt. Ltd Versus Zte Kangxun Telecom Co. India Pvt. Ltd. & Another High Court of Delhi
04-04-2014 Hindustan Unilever Limited, a Company incorporated under the Companies Act Versus The Controller of Patents & Designs Intellectual Property Building G.S.T. Road, Guindy & Others Intellectual Property Appellate Board
26-03-2014 M/s Consim Info Private Limited & Another Versus M/s Google Inc., USA & Another Competition Commission of India
19-03-2014 M/s. Info Softdata Services Private Limited Versus Commissioner of Central Excise & Service Tax, Ranchi Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal East Regional Bench Kolkata