Online bond platforms may offer overseas-regulated products and tax-specific bonds subject to disclosures, compliance safeguards and revised complianc...
Corporate guarantee valuation permits actual ascertainable commission while barring retroactive application and extended-period penalties for bona fid...
Proper-officer jurisdiction under UPGST penalty provisions upheld; participation on merits prevents bypassing the statutory appellate remedy through w...
Transitioned CENVAT credit may validly satisfy mandatory pre-deposit requirements for legacy service tax appeals through Electronic Credit Ledger debi...
Building-plan sanction charges require statutory authority; unauthorised fees and GST were quashed, while labour cess must follow prescribed collectio...
Pure-agent exclusion fails where hotel booking facilitators receive third-party services themselves, making entire customer consideration taxable as r...
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.