Specified regulatory authority income receives conditional tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income character, and return f...
Tax exemption for regulatory authority income applies retrospectively, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-filing...
Input tax credit conditions remain constitutionally valid, with eligible recipient claims considered under GST circulars and retrospective filing dead...
Bogus donation receipts justified commission income assessment and defeated political-party tax exemption for inaccurate accounts and reporting failur...
Pure reimbursement without income element escapes tax withholding, while delayed withholding and unsupported provisions face deferred or renewed scrut...
Public benefit requirement defeats charitable registration where residents' association services are reciprocal, member-only facilities governed by mu...
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.