Video is not a moving picture. What happens if a video camera takes still pictures?
No exemption, the Board wants to say. The issue is exemption to Digital Still Image Video Camera against Sl. No. 314 of Notification No. 21/2002-cus dated 1.3.2002. Since the wording includes 'still image' and 'video', the question was whether the exemption will be available to a video camera or only to a still image camera. Board has done some research and come up with the conclusion that video does not mean a moving picture. It means visual rather than moving.
So there was an opinion that the exemption will be available only for still picture cameras, not the moving ones.
A conference of Chief Commissioners discussed the issue and decided to consult the TRU. So a reference was sent to TRU. Though TRU agreed with the conference, they suggested that the departments of Commerce and Information Technology may be consulted. The Commerce department said they had no comments and the IT department said that with the convergence of technologies, functions are getting converged. Board felt that this was not a categorical clarification.
With no help from either the Commerce department or the IT department, Board was forced to use its own intelligence and now Board proposes to issue a clarification that
the benefit of entry at Sl. No. 314 of notification no. 21/2002-Cus. would not be available to such digital cameras that have the capability to take still as well as moving images and the benefit would be restricted to 'digital cameras with still image capability' only.
What will be the result of this clarification? This will only dig up buried corpses. This serial No. 314 was deleted from the notification on 1.3.2005. So this clarification will have only retrospective effect and litigation.
Source: Board's proposed circular