Feed - Judgment Search Results

Komarla Feeds Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT

Reported in: (2000)74ITD65(Bang.)

the same elements. The original cattle feed will remain cattle feed only even after processing. The main ingredients of the raw

Garg Cattle Feed Industries Vs. Food Corporation of India and ors.

Court: Punjab and Haryana

Reported in: (2009)23VST94(P& H)

cattle feed and therefore, it cannot be treated as a feed itself. It is a raw material to be used for

Skm Animal Feeds and Foods (i) Ltd. Vs. Cc

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Tamil Nadu

Reported in: (2000)(92)LC648Tri(Chennai)

apply to the product imported being Premix vitamin for animal feed manufacture or not. As Against this, the Revenue claims that

Yarana Feeds and Farms Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: [1990]77STC144(Kar)

fish which is non-edible and sold for use as poultry feed. 21. What follows from the clarifications issued by the Commissioner

Animal Feeds Diaries and Chemicals Limited Vs. Orissa State (Preventio ...

Court: Orissa

Reported in: AIR1995Ori84; 1995(I)OLR28

fishes is stored there is likely hood of manufacturing poultry feed although the Managing Director denied the same.During preparation of poultry

Eva Agro Feeds Private Limited Vs. Punjab National Bank

Court: Supreme Court of India

application under Section 9 of the Code against M/s. Amrit Feeds Limited i.e. corporate debtor before the Tribunal. The same was

P.R.Feed and Agro Pvt. Ltd. Vs. the State of Punjab

Court: Punjab and Haryana

Patiala through its director, Deepak Kukreja, 272 bags of cattle feed being perishable in nature were ordered to be released to

Servet Feeds and Minerals (P) Ltd., Jeedimetla, Hyderabad Vs. Commerci ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1999(2)ALD617; 1999(2)ALT653

assessed and collected from the petitioner on sale of 'poultry feed' manufactured by the petitioner out of ingredients purchased from outside

Hindustan Feed Manufacturers Vs. State of Punjab and ors.

Court: Supreme Court of India

Reported in: 1995Supp(1)SCC273

is no reason to exclude that which they eat or feed upon, from the meaning of the word ‘foodstuffs’. If, what

Dixie Feed and Seed Co., Vs. Byrd

Court: US Supreme Court

v. BYRD, 379 U.S. 15 (1964) 379 U.S. 15 DIXIE FEED & SEED CO., INC., ET AL. v. BYRD. APPEAL FROM