<?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>2024 (7) TMI 1753 - CUSTOMS AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULINGS, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=467109</link>
    <description>Projectors capable of direct connection to and designed for use with automatic data processing (ADP) machines are classifiable under CTH 8528 62 00: the Authority applied tariff-heading text, chapter/section notes and specificity principles and concluded the subject projectors, intended to connect to computers via VGA/HDMI ports, fall within that subheading. The projectors do not qualify for exemption under Sl. No. 17 of Notification No. 24/2005 Cus because the exemption requires goods to be solely or principally used in ADP systems; multifunctionality and demonstrated use with non ADP devices mean the applicant failed to discharge the burden of proof, so exemption denied.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 10 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 06 Mar 2026 14:33:19 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=889225" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (7) TMI 1753 - CUSTOMS AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULINGS, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=467109</link>
      <description>Projectors capable of direct connection to and designed for use with automatic data processing (ADP) machines are classifiable under CTH 8528 62 00: the Authority applied tariff-heading text, chapter/section notes and specificity principles and concluded the subject projectors, intended to connect to computers via VGA/HDMI ports, fall within that subheading. The projectors do not qualify for exemption under Sl. No. 17 of Notification No. 24/2005 Cus because the exemption requires goods to be solely or principally used in ADP systems; multifunctionality and demonstrated use with non ADP devices mean the applicant failed to discharge the burden of proof, so exemption denied.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 10 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=467109</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>