Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 13 (0.25 seconds)
The Commissioner, Sales Tax vs Heera Lal Ramesh Chandra on 25 January, 2007 cites

Sarin Chemical Laboratory vs Commissioner Of Sales Tax, U.P on 7 August, 1970

Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sarin Chemical Laboratory v. Commissioner of Sales Tax, U.P. AIR 1972 SC 65 also held that tooth powder in common parlance is considered as a toilet article. In this judgment, Supreme Court referred to the decisions of Allahabad, Bombay and Madras High Courts mentioned above and confirmed the view taken by those High Courts that the tooth powder is a 'toilet requisite'.
Supreme Court of India Cites 3 - Cited by 35 - K S Hegde - Full Document

Collector Of Customs, Bombay vs Swastic Woollen (P) Ltd. & Ors on 10 August, 1988

In the case of Collector of Customs, Bombay v. Swastic Woolen (P) Ltd. . Hon'ble Apex Court held in para 4 "We are of the opinion that when no statutory definition is provided in respect of an item in this Customs Act or the Central Excise Act, this trade understanding, meaning thereby the understanding in the opinion of those who deal with the goods in question is the safest guide."
Supreme Court of India Cites 8 - Cited by 71 - S Mukharji - Full Document

Commissioner, Sales Tax vs Sarin Chemical Laboratory on 29 January, 1969

In the case of Commissioner of Sales Tax v. Sarin Chemical Laboratory reported in 24 STC 406, the question was whether the tooth paste and tooth powder was medicine or toilet requisite or medicine. The Division Bench of this Court held that it is a matter of common knowledge that toothpaste or tooth powder is an essential item of toiletry in the modern life. The Division Bench held as follows:
Allahabad High Court Cites 4 - Cited by 10 - R S Pathak - Full Document

Bpl Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd. vs Collector Of C. Excise on 29 October, 1993

In the case of BPL Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise reported in 104 STC 164, the Supreme Court was concerned with "selsun" anti-dandruff preparation containing 2.5 percent of selenium sulphide, which is the full therapeutic limit permissible under the pharmacopoeia. The said product was manufactured under the drug licence as a medicine, put up as a medicine, used under doctor's advice and sold through chemist's shops on a doctor's prescription. It was held medicine as it was understood in common parlance as medicine.
Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Delhi Cites 3 - Cited by 11 - Full Document
1   2 Next