https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85927 A tobacco cutting machine was held classifiable under Tariff Heading 84.59(2) because the entry for a machine for stripping and cutting tobacco leaf was construed disjunctively. Technical evidence showed stripping and cutting are separate processes performed at different stages and by different machines, and no single machine simultaneously performs both functions in the tobacco industry. Applying settled statutory interpretation, including Section 13 of the General Clauses Act, 1897, the word "and" in the entry was read as "or" to give the provision workable meaning. On that construction, a machine capable of either stripping or cutting tobacco leaf fell within the heading, and the departmental classification was set aside. en-us Thu, 19 Sep 1996 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 09 Aug 2011 11:07:38 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85927 A tobacco cutting machine was held classifiable under Tariff Heading 84.59(2) because the entry for a machine for stripping and cutting tobacco leaf was construed disjunctively. Technical evidence showed stripping and cutting are separate processes performed at different stages and by different machines, and no single machine simultaneously performs both functions in the tobacco industry. Applying settled statutory interpretation, including Section 13 of the General Clauses Act, 1897, the word "and" in the entry was read as "or" to give the provision workable meaning. On that construction, a machine capable of either stripping or cutting tobacco leaf fell within the heading, and the departmental classification was set aside. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 19 Sep 1996 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85927