<?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 564 - WEST BENGAL TAXATION TRIBUNAL</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=159872</link>
    <description>For sales tax classification, a preparation claimed as homoeopathic medicine must itself be shown to have therapeutic efficacy as a combination; a drug manufacturing licence, eligibility certificate, or the medicinal character of individual ingredients was not conclusive. On the materials, Arnika plus hair vitalizer and Triofer tablets were not proved to be homoeopathic medicines or &quot;drugs&quot; merely by their ingredients or licence status. Arnika plus, being marketed as a hair tonic or lotion, fell within the cosmetic entry and was properly classified as a cosmetic, while Triofer tablets did not fall within the cosmetic category and had to be taxed as general goods, requiring adjustment of the assessment.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 20 Feb 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 03 Dec 2013 15:11:42 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=338005" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1998 (2) TMI 564 - WEST BENGAL TAXATION TRIBUNAL</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=159872</link>
      <description>For sales tax classification, a preparation claimed as homoeopathic medicine must itself be shown to have therapeutic efficacy as a combination; a drug manufacturing licence, eligibility certificate, or the medicinal character of individual ingredients was not conclusive. On the materials, Arnika plus hair vitalizer and Triofer tablets were not proved to be homoeopathic medicines or &quot;drugs&quot; merely by their ingredients or licence status. Arnika plus, being marketed as a hair tonic or lotion, fell within the cosmetic entry and was properly classified as a cosmetic, while Triofer tablets did not fall within the cosmetic category and had to be taxed as general goods, requiring adjustment of the assessment.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 20 Feb 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=159872</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>