<?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>2020 (3) TMI 1050 - PUNJAB &amp; HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=393906</link>
    <description>A mango-based fruit drink was treated as falling within Entry 100-D of Schedule-C of the Haryana Value Added Tax Act, 2003 because the entry covered processed or preserved fruits and vegetables, including juice, drink, paste and powder made from fruits or vegetables. The relevant classification test was whether the product was a fruit drink in common parlance, not whether fruit content was predominant or whether the presence of water, sugar and flavouring altered its essential character. A broad, inclusive reading of the entry was adopted, and where two views were possible, the interpretation favourable to the assessee was preferred. On that basis, the product was not an unclassified item.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 13 Mar 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 25 Mar 2020 11:11:27 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=608033" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (3) TMI 1050 - PUNJAB &amp; HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=393906</link>
      <description>A mango-based fruit drink was treated as falling within Entry 100-D of Schedule-C of the Haryana Value Added Tax Act, 2003 because the entry covered processed or preserved fruits and vegetables, including juice, drink, paste and powder made from fruits or vegetables. The relevant classification test was whether the product was a fruit drink in common parlance, not whether fruit content was predominant or whether the presence of water, sugar and flavouring altered its essential character. A broad, inclusive reading of the entry was adopted, and where two views were possible, the interpretation favourable to the assessee was preferred. On that basis, the product was not an unclassified item.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 13 Mar 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=393906</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>