Commercial classification of jute sutli favoured the lower-rate entry, with a later notification treated as clarificatory.

Jute sutli was classified by its ordinary commercial meaning, not by a narrow literal reading of "yarn." The court held that sutli, being a spun strand used for tying and for making tat, patti and bags, fell within the lower-rate entry for jute products rather than the higher-rate entry for imported yarn. The later notification dated 07.10.2002, which expressly included sutli or jute yarn, was treated as clarificatory and supported the view that the commodity was always intended to be covered by the lower-rate entry. The enhancement of tax liability was therefore set aside and relief to the assessee was restored.

---

---

Issues: Whether jute sutli imported by the assessee was liable to tax at 20% as yarn imported from outside India or at 5% under the entry covering tat, patti or bags made from jute, and whether the later notification of 07.10.2002 was clarificatory.

Analysis: The competing notifications were examined to determine the proper classification of jute sutli. The term "yarn" was construed in its ordinary and commercial sense, meaning a spun strand meant primarily for weaving, knitting or rope making. In common parlance, jute sutli is used as a spun strand for tying and for making tat, patti and bags, and it answers the description of jute yarn. The subsequent notification dated 07.10.2002, which expressly included sutli or jute yarn in the relevant entry, supported the view that the earlier omission of those words was not intended to exclude the commodity from the lower rate entry.

Conclusion: Jute sutli was not taxable at 20% under the entry for imported yarn; it fell within the lower-rate entry and the assessee's claim was accepted.

Final Conclusion: The Tribunal's enhancement of tax liability was set aside and the first appellate authority's order granting relief to the assessee was restored.

Ratio Decidendi: A commodity must be classified according to its ordinary commercial understanding, and a later clarificatory notification may be relied upon to confirm that an omitted description was always intended to fall within the earlier lower-rate entry.

---