<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1997 (9) TMI 529 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=104815</link>
    <description>Boroline was treated as a medicinal preparation, not a cosmetic, because its boric ointment composition and stated use for treating chapped skin, cracked nipples, cuts and dry skin showed essential medicinal character under the excise tariff. The change in tariff structure and chapter notes did not alter that classification, which was sustained. Availing exemption during the pending classification dispute, pursuant to an interim without-prejudice direction, did not amount to waiver or estoppel; the assessee remained entitled to contest the correct classification. The classification in favour of the assessee was upheld and the challenge failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 15 Sep 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 31 Aug 2013 18:01:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=141854" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1997 (9) TMI 529 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=104815</link>
      <description>Boroline was treated as a medicinal preparation, not a cosmetic, because its boric ointment composition and stated use for treating chapped skin, cracked nipples, cuts and dry skin showed essential medicinal character under the excise tariff. The change in tariff structure and chapter notes did not alter that classification, which was sustained. Availing exemption during the pending classification dispute, pursuant to an interim without-prejudice direction, did not amount to waiver or estoppel; the assessee remained entitled to contest the correct classification. The classification in favour of the assessee was upheld and the challenge failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 15 Sep 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=104815</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>