Edible ices exemption applied to split products despite dispute over kulfi classification and wrapper composition.

Products marketed as Mango Split-YD and Raspberry Split-YD were examined for tariff classification by reference to their marketed form and the relevant Food Adulteration definition of kulfi. On the facts found, they were not regarded as ice-cream or kulfi, but they still fell within the exemption for edible ices under Notification No. 12/90-C.E. The alternative tariff heading was not entertained because it had not been raised before the lower authorities, and the objection based on the wrapper description was rejected as unsupported since the composition recorded in the order-in-original was not shown to be incorrect.

---

---

Issues: Whether the products Mango Split-YD and Raspberry Split-YD were classifiable as edible ices or kulfi so as to qualify for exemption under Notification No. 12/90-C.E., dated 22-3-1990.

Analysis: The products had to be understood in the form in which they were marketed, and the definition of kulfi in the Prevention of Food Adulteration law was treated as relevant to determine whether the goods could be marketed as kulfi. On the facts found by the lower authority, the products did not answer to ice-cream or kulfi, but were nevertheless covered by the exemption for edible ices. The alternate plea for classification under a different tariff heading was not entertained as it had not been the case before the authorities below, and the objection regarding composition on the wrapper was found unsubstantial because the composition recorded in the order-in-original was not shown to be wrong.

Conclusion: The products were held eligible for exemption under Notification No. 12/90-C.E., and the Revenue's challenge to that classification failed.

---