<?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>2006 (3) TMI 366 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=117512</link>
    <description>Printer driver software recorded on a medium and imported with printers was treated as a separate commodity classifiable under Heading 85.24, because Note 6 to Chapter 85 preserves the identity of software recorded on media even when supplied with the equipment it supports. The software was not treated as firmware, since it was not permanently resident in ROM. Its value was therefore separately assessable and not merged into the printer&#039;s value, with the customs exemption applying to the software on the facts stated. Section 19 of the Customs Act was considered inapplicable because the Customs Tariff Act supplies the relevant classification and valuation framework.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 07 Mar 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 18 Mar 2024 10:17:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=154509" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (3) TMI 366 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=117512</link>
      <description>Printer driver software recorded on a medium and imported with printers was treated as a separate commodity classifiable under Heading 85.24, because Note 6 to Chapter 85 preserves the identity of software recorded on media even when supplied with the equipment it supports. The software was not treated as firmware, since it was not permanently resident in ROM. Its value was therefore separately assessable and not merged into the printer&#039;s value, with the customs exemption applying to the software on the facts stated. Section 19 of the Customs Act was considered inapplicable because the Customs Tariff Act supplies the relevant classification and valuation framework.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 07 Mar 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=117512</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>