Software classification for exemption turns on functional distinction between application software and system software, not broad commercial descriptions.

Software packages were classifiable for exemption only if they fell within the notification's functional distinction between application software and system software. Programmes developed to solve specific user problems, such as word processors, spreadsheets and math packages, qualified as application software, while programmes concerned with basic internal computer operations or utility and environment-support functions did not. The broader commercial description advanced for the assessee was inconsistent with the tariff notification and could not override that classification. Relief was therefore confined to the items properly identified as application software on the basis accepted from the departmental classification, and the wider exemption claim was rejected.

---

---

Issues: Whether the software packages claimed by the assessee were to be classified as application software eligible for exemption, and whether the broader classification suggested by the assessee's expert could be accepted.

Analysis: The relevant tariff notification under Chapter 85 defined application software as programmes developed to solve specific problems and excluded programmes concerned with basic internal operations of the computer. The material showed two competing approaches: one treating a widened range of programmes as application software, including utility and environment-support packages, and the other classifying the items by reference to the appellants' own descriptions. The broader approach was found inconsistent with the notification and with the accepted textual distinction between application software and system software. The opinion of the departmental expert, which treated most listed items as system software and utilities while allowing only a few categories such as word processors, spreadsheets, and math packages as application software, was found to provide a reasonable basis for classification.

Conclusion: The assessee was entitled to relief only in respect of those items which properly fell within application software, as identified on the basis accepted from the departmental classification, and not for the entire claimed list.

Final Conclusion: The software classification claim succeeded only to a limited extent, with exemption confined to application software and the wider claim rejected.

Ratio Decidendi: For exemption purposes, software must be classified according to the notification's functional distinction between programmes solving specific user problems and programmes concerned with the computer's basic internal operations; a broad commercial description cannot override that statutory classification.

---