Search Results for "Milk product"

55 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 55 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Allows Tax Classification Appeal -- 'Appellants Product' Held as Fruit Drink Under UPVAT Act -- Appellants Succeeds Against Commercial Tax Commissioner

The Supreme Court allowed appeals filed by Appellants challenging the classification of their product under the Uttar Pradesh Value Added Tax Act, 200...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Upholds Classification of Nescafe Premix as Coffee Under Entry 3 of Schedule C Part II of Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959. Product 'Coffee and Instant Drinks Nescafe Premix' Held Not Covered by Entry 18(2) (Beverages) Based on Common Parlance Test and Predominant Ingredient.

The case involves a reference under Section 61 of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959, arising from a dispute between the Commissioner of Sales Tax, Mahara...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Allows Appeal in Customs Duty Exemption Case — Crude Degummed Soyabean Oil Not an Agricultural Product Under Notification No. 53/2003-Cus. Nexus Between Imported and Exported Products Established Under DFCE Scheme.

The appellant, Noble Resources and Trading India Private Limited (formerly Andagro Services Pvt. Ltd.), a government-recognized two-star export house,...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Grants Injunction Against YouTuber for Disparaging Marico's Products in Video Review. Court holds that false and malicious statements in product reviews can constitute disparagement, and interim injunction can be granted even if defendant is not a competitor.

The plaintiff, Marico Limited, a company manufacturing and selling various consumer products including hair oils and foods, filed a suit against the d...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Upholds Conviction in Food Adulteration Case Despite Procedural Lapses. Substantial Compliance of Section 13(2) of Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 Sufficient When No Prejudice Caused.

The appellant Vijendra was convicted under Section 7(1)/16(1)(a)(i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 for selling adulterated buffalo m...