TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Soft Serve Classified as Ice Cream Under Tariff Heading 2105.00 Using Common Parlance Test, Appeal Dismissed</h1> <h3>COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, NEW DELHI Versus M/s CONNAUGHT PLAZA RESTAURANT (P) LTD., NEW DELHI</h3> COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, NEW DELHI Versus M/s CONNAUGHT PLAZA RESTAURANT (P) LTD., NEW DELHI - 2012 (286) E.L.T. 321 (SC), 2012 (11) SCR 365, 2012 ... ISSUES: Whether 'soft serve' served at fast food outlets is classifiable under heading 21.05 ('Ice cream and other edible ice') or under heading 04.04 ('Other dairy produce; edible products of animal origin, not elsewhere specified or included') or under heading 2108.91 ('Edible preparations, not elsewhere specified or included') of the Central Excise and Tariff Act, 1985.Whether the term 'ice-cream' in heading 21.05 is to be interpreted according to its scientific and technical meaning or its meaning in common parlance for the purpose of classification under the Tariff Act.Whether the technical specifications and standards prescribed under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1955 (PFA) govern the classification of 'soft serve' under the Tariff Act.Whether the exemption notification for 'softy ice cream' dispensed through vending machines applies to the assessee for the relevant period.Whether the presence or absence of a brand name affects the classification of 'soft serve' under the Tariff Act. RULINGS / HOLDINGS: The Court held that 'soft serve' is classifiable under tariff sub-heading 2105.00 as 'ice-cream' and not under headings 04.04 or 2108.91. The Tribunal erred in classifying 'soft serve' under 2108.91 as 'Edible preparations not elsewhere specified or included.'The term 'ice-cream' in heading 21.05, in the absence of any statutory definition or technical description in the Tariff Act, must be construed according to its meaning in common parlance and commercial understanding rather than its scientific or technical meaning.The technical standards and definitions under the PFA, which regulate quality and composition for food safety and adulteration control, are irrelevant for the purpose of classification under the Tariff Act. The Excise Act's object to raise revenue requires classification based on commercial understanding, not technical standards of other statutes.The exemption notification No. 16/2003-CE (NT) dated 12th March 2003, granting exemption for 'softy ice cream' dispensed through vending machines, does not apply to the assessee for the relevant period since the plea was not raised before the Tribunal and the assessee was liable to pay excise duty as per show cause notices.The question of whether the product bears a brand name is unnecessary to decide given the Court's classification under heading 21.05. RATIONALE: The Court applied the general rules of interpretation for tariff entries under the Tariff Act, which require classification to be determined according to the terms of the headings and chapter or section notes, and where these are not determinative, according to the common parlance understanding of the goods.Precedents confirm that in taxing statutes, words must be construed in their ordinary or popular sense, i.e., how the common man, consumers, and persons dealing with the product understand them, unless a contrary legislative intent or statutory definition exists.The Court distinguished the present case from precedents where technical or scientific meanings prevailed due to explicit statutory definitions or conflicting entries, noting that heading 21.05 contains no such technical definition of 'ice-cream.'The Court rejected reliance on the PFA standards for classification, emphasizing that the PFA's object is food safety regulation, which is distinct from the fiscal purpose of excise classification and duty levy.Trade notices issued by the revenue recognizing 'softy ice cream/soft serve' as classifiable under heading 21.05 support the commercial understanding and classification adopted by the Court.The Court reaffirmed the principle that fiscal statutes cannot be interpreted rigidly by technical or scientific standards when the statute itself uses ordinary language without definitions, and that the common parlance test is appropriate for classification in such contexts.The Court declined to consider new grounds not raised before the Tribunal, such as the applicability of the exemption notification, consistent with principles limiting appellate review to grounds argued below.
TaxTMI 