Statutory definition of pan masala under luxury tax law covers specified mixed ingredients, excluding common parlance analysis.

The luxury tax entry for "pan masala" was treated as a self-contained statutory definition covering combinations of two or more specified substances, including mixtures with other ingredients and whether or not tobacco was added. The words following "such as" were read as trade descriptions, not restrictive examples limiting the genus. Because the statute supplied a complete definition, the common parlance test was not applied. On the admitted composition of broken betel-nuts mixed with menthol and other ingredients, the seized goods satisfied the definition and fell within item 4 of the Schedule, so the challenge to luxury tax coverage failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the seized goods manufactured by the applicant, being broken betel-nuts mixed with menthol and other ingredients, fell within item 4 of the Schedule to the West Bengal Luxury Tax Act, 1994 as "pan masala".

Analysis: Item 4 was held to contain a wide primary description of "pan masala" and, after the words "that is to say", an exhaustive definition covering combinations of two or more specified substances, including combinations mixed with other substances, whether mixed with tobacco or not. The names appearing after "such as" were treated as mere trade names or descriptions and not as restrictive examples of a genus. The common parlance test was held inapplicable because the statute itself supplied a complete definition. On the admitted ingredients and composition of the seized products, they were found to answer the statutory definition.

Conclusion: The seized goods were pan masala within item 4 of the Schedule and the contention that they fell outside the luxury tax entry was rejected.

---