Prospective effect for tax classification of ice-creams upheld where long-standing treatment as sweets supported the Tribunal's discretion.

The Tribunal's grant of prospective effect to its determination of tax liability on ice-creams was upheld because the record showed ice-creams had long been treated as falling within "sweets" or "sweetmeats," including after the relevant date until the Tribunal's ruling. On that basis, the Tribunal's discretion to avoid unsettling past liability rested on a rational foundation. The High Court found no substantial question of law requiring interference and sustained the prospective operation of the ruling.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Tribunal was justified in granting prospective effect to its determination of the tax liability on ice-creams.

Analysis: The record showed that ice-creams had long been treated as falling within the expression "sweets" or "sweetmeats", and that this understanding continued even after the relevant date until the Tribunal's decision. On that footing, the Tribunal exercised its discretion to make the ruling prospective so that past liability would not be prejudiced. The Court found that this approach rested on a rational basis and did not give rise to any substantial question of law warranting interference.

Conclusion: The Tribunal was justified in granting prospective effect, and the challenge failed.

---