Interactive touchscreen panels with integrated computing functions fall under automatic data-processing machines rather than display monitors for cust...
Ex parte injunction service requirements were substantially met, while civil recovery and SFIO investigation into provident fund defalcation continued...
Enforcement of resolution-plan directions continues without a Supreme Court stay, preventing suspension of redistribution and escrowed-fund distributi...
Third-party ownership claims over attached property require Special Court adjudication where purchasers lack registered sale deeds and bona fides rema...
Pure-agent reimbursements in clearing and forwarding services are excluded from taxable value when qualifying third-party payments are properly record...
Customs relief for Strait of Hormuz maritime disruptions remains available, with existing conditions continuing unchanged through the extended validit...
The CESTAT held that the animal feed supplements containing ingredients like calcium, magnesium, phosphorus, vitamin B12 and vitamin D3 are appropriately classified under Heading 2309 and Tariff Item No. 23099090 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The Tribunal observed that the subject goods are nutrient supplements not mentioned in the pharmacopoeias and not prescribed by veterinary doctors for curing ailments, despite prescribed doses. Relying on the Supreme Court's ruling that the burden to prove correct classification lies on the Revenue, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order as the Revenue failed to discharge this burden. The Tribunal upheld its earlier decision in Dabur India Ltd. case classifying similar products as animal feed supplements.
The CESTAT held that the animal feed supplements containing ingredients like calcium, magnesium, phosphorus, vitamin B12 and vitamin D3 are appropriately classified under Heading 2309 and Tariff Item No. 23099090 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The Tribunal observed that the subject goods are nutrient supplements not mentioned in the pharmacopoeias and not prescribed by veterinary doctors for curing ailments, despite prescribed doses. Relying on the Supreme Court's ruling that the burden to prove correct classification lies on the Revenue, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order as the Revenue failed to discharge this burden. The Tribunal upheld its earlier decision in Dabur India Ltd. case classifying similar products as animal feed supplements.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.