The ruling underscores that while health-oriented drinks may be marketed as alternatives to sugary beverages, their tax treatment depends strictly on tariff classification and statutory schedules, not on consumer perception.

Considering the advanced age of the petitioner, it allowed the petitioner to file the appeal before the appellate tribunal and also directed the tribunal to condone the delay.

The appellants failed to provide a credible, legitimate source for these excess funds or reconcile their stated loans and income, noted the court. This led to the conclusion that the construction was clearly financed through proceeds of crime.