<?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>2002 (3) TMI 531 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102393</link>
    <description>Exemption under Notification No. 11/97-Cus. was confined to computer software, and eligibility depended on technical evidence showing the imported software&#039;s character and the working of the machine in which it would operate. A description of use for telecommunication purposes alone was insufficient to establish that the software fell within the notification. In the absence of technical literature or data showing use in a system containing an automatic data processing machine, the issue could not be conclusively determined on the existing record. The matter was therefore remanded for fresh adjudication after consideration of the technical material and machine details.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 15 Mar 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 14 Feb 2012 17:12:06 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=139442" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2002 (3) TMI 531 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102393</link>
      <description>Exemption under Notification No. 11/97-Cus. was confined to computer software, and eligibility depended on technical evidence showing the imported software&#039;s character and the working of the machine in which it would operate. A description of use for telecommunication purposes alone was insufficient to establish that the software fell within the notification. In the absence of technical literature or data showing use in a system containing an automatic data processing machine, the issue could not be conclusively determined on the existing record. The matter was therefore remanded for fresh adjudication after consideration of the technical material and machine details.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 15 Mar 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102393</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>