<?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>1994 (5) TMI 38 - GOVERNMENT OF INDIA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=49176</link>
    <description>Family members living in the same house with a common kitchen and single telephone were treated as one family unit for Notification No. 137/90, so only one concessional unit was available; separate income-tax returns did not alter that position. A used fax machine was treated as a bona fide baggage article, and the earlier restriction on audio processors was found unsustainable, so the confiscation of the fax machine was set aside and the audio processors were released duty free. Rule 4 of the TR Rules was applied to an individual passenger, not the notification&#039;s family concept, and allowance was extended for one computer for use by the daughter-in-law who satisfied the qualification.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 24 May 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 12 Aug 2010 12:29:58 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=87656" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1994 (5) TMI 38 - GOVERNMENT OF INDIA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=49176</link>
      <description>Family members living in the same house with a common kitchen and single telephone were treated as one family unit for Notification No. 137/90, so only one concessional unit was available; separate income-tax returns did not alter that position. A used fax machine was treated as a bona fide baggage article, and the earlier restriction on audio processors was found unsustainable, so the confiscation of the fax machine was set aside and the audio processors were released duty free. Rule 4 of the TR Rules was applied to an individual passenger, not the notification&#039;s family concept, and allowance was extended for one computer for use by the daughter-in-law who satisfied the qualification.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 24 May 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=49176</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>