1999 (4) TMI 160

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ndent. [Order per : P.C. Jain, Vice President] - The question involved in the present appeal filed by the Revenue is about the classification of two products, namely, Mango Split-YD and Respberry split-YD. The original authority has classified the products under sub-heading 2105.00 and not eligible for exemption as edible ices under S. No. 5 of Notification 12/90-C.E., dated 22-3-1990. 2.....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....sp;Against the aforesaid finding, the Revenue has urged that the definition of a product in another statute cannot be made applicable to the Central Excise law. For this proposition, Revenue relied on Tribunal's judgment in the case of Venus Engg. Baroda - 1986 (25) E.L.T. 553 (Tribunal). It is further urged that if the finding of the Collector (Appeals) is considered to be correct, namely that th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... mentioned in the Revenue's appeal. We do not agree with the first ground that the definition of `Kulfi' mentioned in PFA should not be adopted inasmuch as P.F.A. is applicable to the marketing of the goods; so it is only in that form that the Kulfi can be marketed in any other form not conforming to that standard, the product cannot be marketed as Kulfi. Consequently, the definition given in the ....