Companies require a Valid license for the Import of laptops & tablets

Himanshi Singh

Associate, Policy & Advocacy

PUBLISHED ON

Aug 16, 2023

Introduction

Recently the Indian Government banned the import of Laptops and tablets in India under the computers of HSN 8471. According to the notification of the government, Directorate General of foreign trade, there will be restrictions on the import of Laptops, tablets, and other electronic items from 1^st November 2023. The government advised the Domestic companies to apply for the license within three months. As the process is simple, and many local companies have already applied for the license. The government will require a valid license for the import of laptops and other electronic items.

The Government imposed restrictions on the Import of Laptops & other electronic products

The DGFT (The directorate General of foreign trade) imposed restrictions on the import of electronic items in India. And, there has been the final date has also been given that the companies only have 3 months to apply for a valid license, from November 1^st 2023there will be a requirement for a valid license for the import, and there will be a proper ban on the import of laptops & tablets, and other electronic items. The ban is on the HSN-8471. These are the products that indicate that they are taxable. It is a classification code to identify the taxable items. India has sufficient capacity and capability to manufacture their own IT hardware devices and boost production.

The government has notified production linked incentive, PLI Scheme 2.0, for the IT devices, which will soon be disclosed, and the scheme is expected to lead to a total of 29 thousand crore rupees worth of IT hardware nearly. And this will create future job opportunities in the five to six years.

The pros & cons of the import

Banning import has two sides. The positive one is that, it will promote the domestic manufacturers, local companies will able to grow, and there will be job opportunities, but if we talk about the negative side of the import, then the prices will be high for the consumers. One aspect is making India’s digital infrastructure stable, and the other side is affecting consumers.

Reasons Behind the ban on the Import of electronic items

There are the following reasons behind the ban on the Import of laptops and tablets,

The primary reason why the government banned the import of laptops and other electronic items is because of security concerns about the data. And to prevent data theft a step has been taken by the Government.
The banning will help the domestic manufacturer to grow and will provide opportunities to the local companies in India.
It will help in the creation of Job vacancies in the country.
There will be a curb down of selling of Chinese products.

The government will promote the digital infrastructure of India by putting a ban on imports. Such as there are domestic companies like Reliance recently launched a laptop by the name of Jio Book, and there is a company that sells the cheapest tablet called Aakash, so the import ban will promote these types of electronic items of the local companies. This step will soon result in digital advancement in India.

Conclusion

The laptop, tablets, and other electronic products that have been banned in India will make a substantial move with the implications. The objective of the ban is to encourage domestic manufacturing and to secure the data, however, it will also affect the consumers which can not be ignored. The other future effects are yet to be seen. But the one scenario is clear, that the policy will significantly make a change in India’s Technology industry.

PUBLISHED ON

Aug 16, 2023

Related Blogs

Perception vs Reality, The LPG Panic and the Effects of Misinformation

April 5, 2026

In recent months, conversations around the possible shortage of liquefied petroleum gas (LPG), a basic cooking fuel in Indian households, have quietly resurfaced across the country. From whispers in local markets to viral messages circulating on social media, concerns about LPG availability began to take hold in the public imagination. Though the immediacy of the situation has since faded, its echoes remain, reminding us how quickly uncertainty can spread. Like a ripple across still water, a single rumour can travel far, gathering force as it moves and blurring the line between perception and reality.

Against this backdrop, in April 2026, reports began circulating about a potential LPG shortage. The Union Government moved quickly to counter what it identified as misinformation, emphasising that supply remained stable and urging citizens not to engage in panic buying. A noticeable disconnect emerged between official communication and public perception. Across different regions, signs of anxiety-driven behaviour became evident. Instances of panic buying and hoarding increased, law enforcement agencies conducted raids to address such actions, and opportunistic thefts were reported, often exploiting widespread concern. These incidents highlight how misinformation, even when addressed promptly, can continue to shape public behaviour.

It is worth noting that rising prices also played a role in shaping public response, as increases in LPG rates contributed to a sense of urgency among consumers. Therefore, the surge in panic buying cannot be attributed solely to misinformation, but rather to a combination of economic pressures and perceived scarcity.

‍

Misinformation Ecosystem - From Rumours to Behaviour
‍

The spread of misinformation is occurring at an unprecedented pace and is, in large part, driven by the viral nature of social media. Digital platforms not only enable the rapid dissemination of information but also allow it to be amplified in ways that would not be possible through traditional media outlets. Often, the drive for virality outweighs any concern for accuracy, meaning that many individuals who spread misinformation are motivated more by the pursuit of attention than by any ideological agenda. Recent arrests of individuals involved in spreading misinformation about LPG and petrol shortages, much of which went viral, suggest that misinformation today is frequently driven by the desire for visibility rather than ideological motives. The information being circulated has largely followed a similar pattern, focusing on fears of an LPG shortage, expectations of price increases, and concerns about supply disruptions. Even though this information has not been verified, it has triggered behavioural responses among individuals. In several areas, including parts of Uttar Pradesh and Goa, the spread of misinformation through social media has led to panic buying, despite official assurances that there would be sufficient LPG supply to meet demand.

‍

The impact of panic buying, and its associated misinformation, has already been seen in multiple sectors; these increased demands have placed pressure on the distribution network, leading to disruptions in access, as well as being out of stock of certain products. In many cases, commercial users of products (especially restaurants) have experienced significant disruption, threatening their continued operations, and industry representatives have alerted others about the inconsistent supply of commercial cylinders; likewise, consumers (households) are beginning to switch to alternative products (e.g., induction cooking) as a reflection of the anticipatory mindset to address the uncertainty created through perceptions of Product Scarcity.
‍

‍

State Response: Managing Misinformation or Behaviour?
‍

‍

The government has taken a variety of approaches, from advisories and enforcement actions to communicating with citizens indirectly. For example, State Governments have been directed to combat misinformation, monitor supply chains and take action against hoarding and black market activity. There has been a significant increase in the level of large- scale enforcement activity, with over 3,700 raids carried out to crack down on hoarding and black marketing related to LPG, in addition to confiscating cylinders and issuing penalties to those who break the law. In addition, the authorities have also focused on maintaining regular communication with the public in order to reassure them about the supply of LPG and fuel stability.

‍

Geopolitical Context: Why Rumours Are Believable
‍

Understanding today’s panic requires an understanding of the global environment: i.e., due to the ongoing conflict in West Asia, the energy markets are unstable, and energy supply is uncertain not only in West Asia but across a large part of the world. Even if domestic supply remains stable, public perception is affected by global instability. A clear example of this can be seen in neighbouring countries to India; Pakistan has seen significant increases in the cost of fuel, implemented measures such as reducing the number of days individuals work each week, and has created public support mechanisms; Bangladesh has imposed restrictions on the use of energy, has shortened the number of hours individuals can operate businesses each day, and has restricted the total amount of energy used; Sri Lanka has begun to ration fuel, and to increase the price of petrol; and Nepal has reduced the numbers of days individuals may work each week, and has adjusted supply.

‍

All of these examples are not isolated instances, but are markers of a common regional environment. As we live in a global community that is connected in many ways, these developments will quickly affect public expectations everywhere. Therefore, for consumers in India, seeing evidence of rationing of fuel and shortages of fuel in neighbouring countries increases their belief that these types of problems could occur in their country.

‍

Critical Perspective: Between Panic and Precaution
‍

The LPG incident has brought about questions surrounding the nature of misinformation in terms of its definition & regulation. One of the main concerns is whether or not "misinformation" is being cast too widely. To be sure, false claims need to be addressed; however, not everything that is responded to publicly is based on untrue facts, as many times public responses are based on perceived risk via global and/or local incidents that occur. Perhaps the greatest challenge is the difficulty in differentiating precaution and panic. People’s memories of the COVID-19 pandemic are fresh in their minds and will serve to influence their behaviours moving onward, in that many people are stockpiling or preparing for uncertainty not out of irrational fear, but as an anticipatory response to their prior experiences.

‍

Conclusion
‍

The Indian LPG "crisis" is not so much a problem with actual supply chain breakdown as it is a result of how information and behaviour are connected through perception. This cohabitating environment of panic buying, law enforcement, and government assurance demonstrates an evident disconnect and gap between how governments present a narrative and how the public responds. While there is some role of misinformation within this discourse, the misinformation itself extends beyond any or all false claims about LPG supply and operates within a greater ecosystem of global uncertainty and personal experience. As such, and because of this, perception becomes an incredibly strong force in itself that produces true economic consequences.

‍

Reference
‍

#FactCheck - Viral Claim About Nitish Kumar’s Resignation Over UGC Protests Is Misleading

January 27, 2026

Executive Summary

‍

A news video is being widely circulated on social media with the claim that Bihar Chief Minister Nitish Kumar has resigned from his post in protest against the ongoing UGC-related controversy. Several users are sharing the clip while alleging that Kumar stepped down after opposing the issue. However, CyberPeace research has found the claim to be false. The researchrevealed that the video being shared is from 2022 and has no connection whatsoever with the UGC or any recent protests related to it. An old video has been misleadingly linked to a current issue to spread misinformation on social media.

‍

Claim:

‍

An Instagram user shared a video on January 26 claiming that Bihar Chief Minister Nitish Kumar had resigned. The post further alleged that the news was first aired on Republic channel and that Kumar had submitted his resignation to then-Governor Phagu Chauhan. The link to the post, its archived version, and screenshots can be seen below. (Links as provided)

‍

‍

Fact Check:

‍

To verify the claim, CyberPeace first conducted a keyword-based search on Google. No credible or established media organisation reported any such resignation, clearly indicating that the viral claim lacked authenticity.

‍

‍

Further, the voiceover in the viral video states that Nitish Kumar handed over his resignation to Governor Phagu Chauhan. However, Phagu Chauhan ceased to be the Governor of Bihar in February 2023. The current Governor of Bihar is Arif Mohammad Khan, making the claim in the video factually incorrect and misleading.

‍

‍

In the next step, keyframes from the viral video were extracted and reverse-searched using Google Lens. This led to the official YouTube channel of Republic Bharat, where the full version of the same video was found. The video was uploaded on August 9, 2022. This clearly establishes that the clip circulating on social media is not recent and is being shared out of context.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yk-gC7KD3ao

‍

‍

Conclusion

CyberPeace’s research confirms that the viral video claiming Nitish Kumar resigned over the UGC issue is false. The video dates back to 2022 and has no link to the current UGC controversy. An old political video has been deliberately circulated with a misleading narrative to create confusion on social media.

‍

Addressing Cross-Border Misinformation: The Need for International Cooperation

October 29, 2024

Misinformation is a scourge in the digital world, making the most mundane experiences fraught with risk. The threat is considerably heightened in conflict settings, especially in the modern era, where geographical borders blur and civilians and conflict actors alike can take to the online realm to discuss -and influence- conflict events. Propaganda can complicate the narrative and distract from the humanitarian crises affecting civilians, while also posing a serious threat to security operations and law and order efforts. Sensationalised reports of casualties and manipulated portrayals of military actions contribute to a cycle of violence and suffering.

A study conducted by MIT found the mere thought of sharing news on social media reduced the ability to judge whether a story was true or false; the urge to share outweighed the consideration of accuracy (2023). Cross-border misinformation has become a critical issue in today's interconnected world, driven by the rise of digital communication platforms. To effectively combat misinformation, coordinated international policy frameworks and cooperation between governments, platforms, and global institutions are created.

The Global Nature of Misinformation

Cross-border misinformation is false or misleading information that spreads across countries. Out-of-border creators amplify information through social media and digital platforms and are a key source of misinformation. Misinformation can interfere with elections, and create serious misconceptions about health concerns such as those witnessed during the COVID-19 pandemic, or even lead to military conflicts.

The primary challenge in countering cross-border misinformation is the difference in national policies, legal frameworks and governance policies of social media platforms across various jurisdictions. Examining the existing international frameworks, such as cybersecurity treaties and data-sharing agreements used for financial crimes might be helpful to effectively address cross-border misinformation. Adapting these approaches to the digital information ecosystem, nations could strengthen their collective response to the spread of misinformation across borders. Global institutions like the United Nations or regional bodies like the EU and ASEAN can work together to set a unified response and uniform international standards for regulation dealing with misinformation specifically.

Current National and Regional Efforts

Many countries have taken action to deal with misinformation within their borders. Some examples include:

The EU’s Digital Services Act has been instrumental in regulating online intermediaries and platforms including marketplaces, social networks, content-sharing platforms, app stores, etc. The legislation aims to prevent illegal and harmful activities online and the spread of disinformation.
The primary legislation that governs cyberspace in India is the IT Act of 2000 and its corresponding rules (IT Rules, 2023), which impose strict requirements on social media platforms to counter misinformation content and enable the traceability of the creator responsible for the origin of misinformation. Platforms have to conduct due diligence, failing which they risk losing their safe harbour protection. The recently-enacted DPDP Act of 2023 indirectly addresses personal data misuse that can be used to contribute to the creation and spread of misinformation. Also, the proposed Digital India Act is expected to focus on “user harms” specific to the online world.
In the U.S., the Right to Editorial Discretion and Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act place the responsibility for regulating misinformation on private actors like social media platforms and social media regulations. The US government has not created a specific framework addressing misinformation and has rather encouraged voluntary measures by SMPs to have independent policies to regulate misinformation on their platforms.

The common gap area across these policies is the absence of a standardised, global framework for addressing cross-border misinformation which results in uneven enforcement and dependence on national regulations.

Key Challenges in Achieving International Cooperation

Some of the key challenges identified in achieving international cooperation to address cross-border misinformation are as follows:

Geopolitical tensions can emerge due to the differences in political systems, priorities, and trust issues between countries that hinder attempts to cooperate and create a universal regulation.
The diversity in approaches to internet governance and freedom of speech across countries complicates the matters further.
Further complications arise due to technical and legal obstacles around the issues of sovereignty, jurisdiction and enforcement, further complicating matters relating to the monitoring and removal of cross-border misinformation.

CyberPeace Recommendations

The UN Global Principles For Information Integrity Recommendations for Multi-stakeholder Action, unveiled on 24 June 2024, are a welcome step for addressing cross-border misinformation. This can act as the stepping stone for developing a framework for international cooperation on misinformation, drawing inspiration from other successful models like climate change agreements, international criminal law framework etc.
Collaborations like public-private partnerships between government, tech companies and civil societies can help enhance transparency, data sharing and accountability in tackling cross-border misinformation.
Engaging in capacity building and technology transfers in less developed countries would help to create a global front against misinformation.

Conclusion

We are in an era where misinformation knows no borders and the need for international cooperation has never been more urgent. Global democracies are exploring solutions, both regulatory and legislative, to limit the spread of misinformation, however, these fragmented efforts fall short of addressing the global scale of the problem. Establishing a standardised, international framework, backed by multilateral bodies like the UN and regional alliances, can foster accountability and facilitate shared resources in this fight. Through collaborative action, transparent regulations, and support for developing nations, the world can create a united front to curb misinformation and protect democratic values, ensuring information integrity across borders.

Companies require a Valid license for the Import of laptops & tablets

Introduction