<?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>2001 (8) TMI 1342 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160852</link>
    <description>A revision court will not interfere with a Tribunal&#039;s product-classification finding when it is a pure factual determination supported by evidence and not shown to be perverse or made without material. Here, the Tribunal found that the product&#039;s dominant ingredient was rice husk and that it was not a medicine, so the classification challenge failed and no question of law arose.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 03 Aug 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 25 Dec 2013 16:31:03 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=340735" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (8) TMI 1342 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160852</link>
      <description>A revision court will not interfere with a Tribunal&#039;s product-classification finding when it is a pure factual determination supported by evidence and not shown to be perverse or made without material. Here, the Tribunal found that the product&#039;s dominant ingredient was rice husk and that it was not a medicine, so the classification challenge failed and no question of law arose.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 03 Aug 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160852</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>