<?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>2008 (3) TMI 146 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=30223</link>
    <description>Exemption entitlement for imported computer monitors depended on the notification conditions, not on monitor classification alone. Monitors cleared together with a CPU as a desktop computer set qualified for Notification No. 6/2006 because the exemption covered computers supplied as a set with monitor, mouse and keyboard, even if the monitor was separately classifiable under heading 8528. Separately imported monitors also qualified for Notification No. 24/2005 where the record showed they were intended for use with desktop computers, and an incorrect importer classification did not defeat that factual entitlement. The result was availability of exemption benefits for both categories of monitors.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 10 Mar 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 18 Aug 2008 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=68880" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (3) TMI 146 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=30223</link>
      <description>Exemption entitlement for imported computer monitors depended on the notification conditions, not on monitor classification alone. Monitors cleared together with a CPU as a desktop computer set qualified for Notification No. 6/2006 because the exemption covered computers supplied as a set with monitor, mouse and keyboard, even if the monitor was separately classifiable under heading 8528. Separately imported monitors also qualified for Notification No. 24/2005 where the record showed they were intended for use with desktop computers, and an incorrect importer classification did not defeat that factual entitlement. The result was availability of exemption benefits for both categories of monitors.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 10 Mar 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=30223</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>