Dispute Resolution Panel objections must reach both prescribed forums; otherwise assessment may proceed and statutory appeal remains the proper remedy...
Political contribution deductions require recipient party compliance with contribution-reporting conditions; banking-channel donations alone do not qu...
Aggregation under TNMM prevents selective testing of intra-group services without comparable uncontrolled transactions, while appellate additional cla...
Protective assessment cannot duplicate identical receipts under competing characterisations; remote services did not establish a taxable permanent est...
Current account treatment of overseas tournament services removed most FEMA findings, but excess EEFC remittance and delayed repatriation remained bre...
Modification of bail conditions remains available through inherent jurisdiction where onerous deposits undermine justice and cannot recover disputed d...
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.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
