<?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>2007 (11) TMI 203 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=3994</link>
    <description>An imported server was held outside the Exim Policy restriction on second-hand computers because the ban was directed at second-hand personal computers and laptops, not network-specific servers. The distinction turned on commercial parlance and on the server&#039;s different physical and functional characteristics, including administrative and resource-control functions. The policy could not be extended beyond its intended scope, so the import was not hit by the restriction. The valuation finding was not shown to be erroneous, and the confiscation, reduced redemption fine and penalty were sustained on other grounds; the Revenue&#039;s challenge therefore failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 28 Nov 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 14 May 2008 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=43341" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (11) TMI 203 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=3994</link>
      <description>An imported server was held outside the Exim Policy restriction on second-hand computers because the ban was directed at second-hand personal computers and laptops, not network-specific servers. The distinction turned on commercial parlance and on the server&#039;s different physical and functional characteristics, including administrative and resource-control functions. The policy could not be extended beyond its intended scope, so the import was not hit by the restriction. The valuation finding was not shown to be erroneous, and the confiscation, reduced redemption fine and penalty were sustained on other grounds; the Revenue&#039;s challenge therefore failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 28 Nov 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=3994</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>