<?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>1998 (2) TMI 544 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=159116</link>
    <description>Vicco Vajradanti toothpaste, powder and Vicco Turmeric cream were treated as drugs and medicines, not toilet or cosmetic articles, for sales tax purposes because a competent authority had recognised them as medicines under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 and they were manufactured and sold under a valid licence. That statutory classification could not be displaced merely because the taxing statute did not define &quot;drugs and medicines&quot; or because the goods were also known in trade as toothpaste, powder or cream. The matter was also governed by earlier judicial decisions, so no debatable question of law arose and the Revenue&#039;s reference application was rejected.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 17 Feb 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 15 Nov 2013 18:39:42 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=335783" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1998 (2) TMI 544 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=159116</link>
      <description>Vicco Vajradanti toothpaste, powder and Vicco Turmeric cream were treated as drugs and medicines, not toilet or cosmetic articles, for sales tax purposes because a competent authority had recognised them as medicines under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 and they were manufactured and sold under a valid licence. That statutory classification could not be displaced merely because the taxing statute did not define &quot;drugs and medicines&quot; or because the goods were also known in trade as toothpaste, powder or cream. The matter was also governed by earlier judicial decisions, so no debatable question of law arose and the Revenue&#039;s reference application was rejected.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 17 Feb 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=159116</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>