<?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>2003 (12) TMI 129 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52414</link>
    <description>Digitised seismic survey data imported on cartridges was held not to be &quot;IT software&quot; because it contained no source code, object code or independent interactivity, so exemption under the software entry was denied. The requirement to produce the Directorate General of Hydrocarbons certificate at the time of import was treated as procedural rather than substantive; late production did not automatically defeat the exemption claim, and that issue was remanded for fresh consideration. Penalty was set aside because no clandestine evasion or deliberate misconduct was shown and the importer could have bona fide believed the goods qualified for exemption.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 09 Dec 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 05 Oct 2010 16:57:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=90891" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (12) TMI 129 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52414</link>
      <description>Digitised seismic survey data imported on cartridges was held not to be &quot;IT software&quot; because it contained no source code, object code or independent interactivity, so exemption under the software entry was denied. The requirement to produce the Directorate General of Hydrocarbons certificate at the time of import was treated as procedural rather than substantive; late production did not automatically defeat the exemption claim, and that issue was remanded for fresh consideration. Penalty was set aside because no clandestine evasion or deliberate misconduct was shown and the importer could have bona fide believed the goods qualified for exemption.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 09 Dec 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52414</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>