Patent-settlement expenditure treated as commercially expedient revenue outlay, with foreign-law restrictions inapplicable before the prospective amen...
In a case before the High Court, the issue was whether de-oiled items used as animal-food, cattle-food, poultry-food, and fish-food are exempt goods. The Doctrine of Ejusdem generis was not considered. The revisionist argued that paddy husk is not covered by the relevant entry and is not exempt. The Court held that the question was already answered by the Supreme Court in a previous case where it was established that certain by-products, including de-oiled items, are exempt under the VAT Act. Since the legal issue was settled u/s the Supreme Court decision, the revision was dismissed at the admission stage.
In a case before the High Court, the issue was whether de-oiled items used as animal-food, cattle-food, poultry-food, and fish-food are exempt goods. The Doctrine of Ejusdem generis was not considered. The revisionist argued that paddy husk is not covered by the relevant entry and is not exempt. The Court held that the question was already answered by the Supreme Court in a previous case where it was established that certain by-products, including de-oiled items, are exempt under the VAT Act. Since the legal issue was settled u/s the Supreme Court decision, the revision was dismissed at the admission stage.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
