Just a moment...
Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether edible preparations served in restaurant packaging such as butter paper, paperboard, trays, pouches, paperboard cones or similar boxes were "put up in unit containers" so as to fall under tariff heading 1601.10 and attract central excise duty.
Analysis: The relevant tariff scheme treats preparations of meat under Chapter 16 as dutiable under heading 1601.10 only when they are put up in unit containers and bear a brand name. A unit container is one designed to hold a predetermined quantity. The serving materials used in the restaurant were meant for immediate consumption in the premises and functioned as service ware, not as retail or wholesale containers holding a predetermined quantity. The mode of serving food in a restaurant cannot by itself determine excisability. The reasoning adopted below ignored the distinction between restaurant service and packing of goods for clearance, and the earlier Tribunal decisions relied upon by the appellant supported the view that such containers do not satisfy the tariff description of unit containers.
Conclusion: The goods were not put up in unit containers for the purpose of heading 1601.10 and were not liable to central excise duty on that basis.