<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1992 (7) TMI 172 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=81939</link>
    <description>Imported floppy disk drives were treated as machines for transcribing data on to data media in coded form, bringing them within Notification No. 40/82 at Sl. No. 2. The Tribunal relied on its earlier consistent view that floppy disk drives themselves perform that function and rejected the narrower departmental interpretation that only a complete floppy disk system qualified for exemption. On that basis, the exemption was available to the imported drives.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 21 Jul 1992 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 29 Jun 2011 18:07:57 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=119084" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1992 (7) TMI 172 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=81939</link>
      <description>Imported floppy disk drives were treated as machines for transcribing data on to data media in coded form, bringing them within Notification No. 40/82 at Sl. No. 2. The Tribunal relied on its earlier consistent view that floppy disk drives themselves perform that function and rejected the narrower departmental interpretation that only a complete floppy disk system qualified for exemption. On that basis, the exemption was available to the imported drives.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 21 Jul 1992 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=81939</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>