Revisional jurisdiction and common parlance classification: liquid mango juice covered by the schedule, but powder products excluded.

An expressly conferred revisional power under the Act extended to advance ruling orders, so the Commissioner could revise the Authority's decision. On classification, Entry 3 of the Third Schedule had to be read as a whole in common parlance, covering processed fruit and vegetable products in liquid, semi-liquid, paste, squash, drink or juice form. Applying that construction, the liquid mango juice product was covered by the entry, while the concentrated powder products were not. The appeal was therefore only partly allowed, with revision jurisdiction upheld and the classification modified accordingly.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the Commissioner had revisional jurisdiction under the Act to interfere with the Advance Ruling Authority's order. (ii) Whether the goods in question fell within Entry 3 of the Third Schedule as processed fruit and vegetable products.

Issue (i): Whether the Commissioner had revisional jurisdiction under the Act to interfere with the Advance Ruling Authority's order.

Analysis: The statutory scheme made the order of the Advance Ruling Authority final only subject to the revisional power expressly conferred on the Commissioner. Section 64(2) specifically included orders of the Authority for Clarification and Advance Rulings within the Commissioner's revisional power. The fact that the Authority consisted of multiple Additional Commissioners, or that the Commissioner constituted the Authority, did not dilute the express statutory revision power.

Conclusion: The Commissioner had jurisdiction to revise the Advance Ruling Authority's order.

Issue (ii): Whether the goods in question fell within Entry 3 of the Third Schedule as processed fruit and vegetable products.

Analysis: Entry 3 had to be read as a whole and construed in common parlance. The specified items in the entry showed a common character of processed fruit and vegetable products in liquid, semi-liquid, paste, squash, drink, or juice form. On that basis, liquid mango juice product was treated as covered, but products in concentrated powder form stood on a different footing and were not covered by the entry. The cited precedents did not compel a different result because they dealt with paste-type products or distinct factual situations.

Conclusion: Mango Juc-Fit in liquid form was covered by the entry, while Mango Fruit Booster, Rasna Utsav, and Orange Juc-up in powder form were not.

Final Conclusion: The revision power of the Commissioner was upheld, but the tax classification was modified to include the liquid product within the schedule entry and exclude the powder products, resulting in a partial allowance of the appeal.

Ratio Decidendi: A schedule entry must be construed as a whole in its commercial or common parlance sense, and where the statutory description points to liquid, semi-liquid, paste, squash, drink, or juice forms, concentrated powder products are not covered unless the entry clearly includes them; an expressly conferred revisional power can extend to advance ruling orders.

---