<?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>1988 (2) TMI 434 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=155260</link>
    <description>Products manufactured under a Drugs and Cosmetics Act licence were treated as drugs and medicines for sales tax exemption because fiscal classification depended on their commercial meaning in trade, reinforced by the statutory controls governing drugs. On that basis, the exemption notifications applied and consequential central sales tax relief followed. Tax collected without authority of law was held refundable when paid under a mistake of law, and the doctrine of unjust enrichment did not defeat the refund claim in the circumstances. The claim for the originally sought interest was rejected, but a limited interest direction was substituted if refund was delayed beyond the stipulated period.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 03 Feb 1988 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Sep 2013 17:26:41 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=172291" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1988 (2) TMI 434 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=155260</link>
      <description>Products manufactured under a Drugs and Cosmetics Act licence were treated as drugs and medicines for sales tax exemption because fiscal classification depended on their commercial meaning in trade, reinforced by the statutory controls governing drugs. On that basis, the exemption notifications applied and consequential central sales tax relief followed. Tax collected without authority of law was held refundable when paid under a mistake of law, and the doctrine of unjust enrichment did not defeat the refund claim in the circumstances. The claim for the originally sought interest was rejected, but a limited interest direction was substituted if refund was delayed beyond the stipulated period.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 03 Feb 1988 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=155260</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>