<?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>2015 (12) TMI 247 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=268943</link>
    <description>The Supreme Court referred a case involving the classification of Vitamin E-50 as &quot;Prawn Feed&quot; for duty exemption under Notification No. 20/99 to a larger Bench for resolution. The Court questioned the applicability of previous judgments and emphasized the strict interpretation of exemption notifications, particularly the distinction between &quot;ingredients&quot; and &quot;supplements&quot; in determining eligibility for duty exemptions.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 08 Oct 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 12 Apr 2022 15:41:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=407701" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (12) TMI 247 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=268943</link>
      <description>The Supreme Court referred a case involving the classification of Vitamin E-50 as &quot;Prawn Feed&quot; for duty exemption under Notification No. 20/99 to a larger Bench for resolution. The Court questioned the applicability of previous judgments and emphasized the strict interpretation of exemption notifications, particularly the distinction between &quot;ingredients&quot; and &quot;supplements&quot; in determining eligibility for duty exemptions.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 08 Oct 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=268943</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>