Just a moment...

βœ•
Top
Help
πŸš€ New: Section-Wise Filter βœ•

1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule β€” now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available

2. New: β€œIn Favour Of” filter added in Case Laws.

Try both these filters in Case Laws β†’

×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedbackβœ•

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

1983 (8) TMI 261

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ariff and, if so, whether it is covered by the expression "ready-to-serve beverages" occurring in S. No. 9 of exemption Notification No. 17/70-C.E., dated 1-3-1970. 2. The facts in brief are that the respondent company submitted classification lists on 30-6-1979 and 21-6-1980 declaring `Milkafe' under Item 1B and claiming exemption under the aforesaid notification. The classification suggested by them was approved provisionally under Rule 9B of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. Later, after hearing the respondent company, the Asstt. Collector held that though the product fell under Item 1B, it was a ready-to-serve beverage and hence not exempt under the notification. In appeal, the Appellate Collector held that it was not a ready-to-ser....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....decided in the light of the popular meaning of the expression ready-to-serve beverage. Though the Chemical Examiner who tested the sample of the product and gave his report on 21-12-1979 said that the sample was not a ready-to-serve beverage, this part of the Chemical Examiner's report consisted of his own views on classification which were beyond his field of knowledge and beyond his jurisdiction as a Chemical Examiner assigned the task of analysing the composition of the sample. The quasi-judicial authorities in the Department were not bound by what the Chemical Examiner stated by way of his personal opinion on classification nor by what was stated in the Department's tariff advices and circulars. 3. The respondent company stated th....