<?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>2013 (10) TMI 626 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=238171</link>
    <description>In appeals against customs duty demand on imported telecom equipment and software, the Tribunal found no prima facie basis for complete waiver of pre-deposit. It noted that the contract appeared to be for supply of the system as a whole, with hardware and software value split only in purchase orders and invoices, and that the separate import of software may have been a sham. Authorities concerning software used with ordinary computers were treated as distinguishable because the present dispute involved telecom equipment supplied with pre-loaded hardware and software. The appellants were therefore required to make a partial pre-deposit for admission of the appeals, while waiver of pre-deposit of interest and penalties and stay of recovery were granted subject to that deposit.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 04 Jul 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 17 Oct 2013 11:27:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=329996" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (10) TMI 626 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=238171</link>
      <description>In appeals against customs duty demand on imported telecom equipment and software, the Tribunal found no prima facie basis for complete waiver of pre-deposit. It noted that the contract appeared to be for supply of the system as a whole, with hardware and software value split only in purchase orders and invoices, and that the separate import of software may have been a sham. Authorities concerning software used with ordinary computers were treated as distinguishable because the present dispute involved telecom equipment supplied with pre-loaded hardware and software. The appellants were therefore required to make a partial pre-deposit for admission of the appeals, while waiver of pre-deposit of interest and penalties and stay of recovery were granted subject to that deposit.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 04 Jul 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=238171</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>