Specific tariff entry prevails over residuary classification for branded potato chips; binding clarification also justified writ intervention.

Branded potato chips were treated as falling within the specific tariff entry for processed fruits and vegetables, because a specific entry prevails over a residuary entry where the goods reasonably fit the specific description. The presence of a separate entry for savouries sold without a brand name did not require branded potato chips to be classified under the residuary entry. The article also notes that a Commissioner's clarification binds subordinate assessing authorities, so requiring the assessee to pursue assessment would serve no useful purpose. On that basis, writ intervention remained available and the classification clarification was not sustainable.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether branded potato chips were classifiable under Entry 107 of Part B of the First Schedule to the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 as processed fruits and vegetables, or under the residuary Entry 69 of Part C of the First Schedule; (ii) Whether the writ petition could be declined on the ground of availability of the alternative remedy of assessment despite the Commissioner's clarification binding the assessing authorities.

Issue (i): Whether branded potato chips were classifiable under Entry 107 of Part B of the First Schedule to the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 as processed fruits and vegetables, or under the residuary Entry 69 of Part C of the First Schedule.

Analysis: The controlling principle is that a specific entry must be preferred to a residuary entry, and the residuary entry applies only when the goods cannot reasonably be brought within any specific description. Potato chips are made from potatoes by processing them, including cutting and frying, and the expression "processed vegetables" is wide enough to include such goods. The existence of a separate entry for savouries sold without a brand name did not justify treating branded potato chips as residuary goods when a specific entry covered processed vegetables.

Conclusion: The branded potato chips were held to fall within the specific entry for processed vegetables and not within the residuary entry, in favour of the assessee.

Issue (ii): Whether the writ petition could be declined on the ground of availability of the alternative remedy of assessment despite the Commissioner's clarification binding the assessing authorities.

Analysis: A clarification issued by the Commissioner binds subordinate assessing authorities, so an assessee could not realistically expect a different result at the assessment stage. In such a situation, relegating the assessee to the assessment remedy would serve no useful purpose. The availability of an alternative remedy therefore did not justify refusal to entertain the writ petition.

Conclusion: The writ petition was maintainable and should not have been rejected on the ground of alternative remedy, in favour of the assessee.

Final Conclusion: The impugned classification clarification could not be sustained, and the assessee was entitled to the relief sought in the writ petition.

Ratio Decidendi: Where goods reasonably answer a specific tariff entry, they cannot be forced into a residuary entry, and a binding tax clarification may justify writ intervention notwithstanding the theoretical availability of assessment remedies.

---