<?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>2007 (7) TMI 634 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174280</link>
    <description>Classification of products under sales tax entries depends on commercial parlance, composition, intended use, product literature, and licensing status, not on dictionary meaning alone. On the record, Keo Karpin Hair Vitalizer and Keo Karpin Baby Oil were manufactured under permission issued under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, marketed as medicinal preparations, and described by their labels and composition as having therapeutic and preventive use. The revenue did not adduce material to show that the market understood them as cosmetics, and the fact that they were sold over the counter did not exclude medicament status. They were therefore classifiable as medicines, drugs, or pharmaceutical preparations, not as cosmetics or perfumery.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 27 Jul 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 17 Nov 2017 11:05:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=400039" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (7) TMI 634 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174280</link>
      <description>Classification of products under sales tax entries depends on commercial parlance, composition, intended use, product literature, and licensing status, not on dictionary meaning alone. On the record, Keo Karpin Hair Vitalizer and Keo Karpin Baby Oil were manufactured under permission issued under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, marketed as medicinal preparations, and described by their labels and composition as having therapeutic and preventive use. The revenue did not adduce material to show that the market understood them as cosmetics, and the fact that they were sold over the counter did not exclude medicament status. They were therefore classifiable as medicines, drugs, or pharmaceutical preparations, not as cosmetics or perfumery.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 27 Jul 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174280</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>