9911796707
TMI Blog1996 (3) TMI 187X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 107.91 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as the Tariff ). Heading No. 21.07 covers edible preparations not elsewhere specified or included . The Order-in-Appeal, dated 31-5-1994 was issued following the decision in the above order dated 30-5-1994. 2. The matter was heard on 19-9-1995 when Shri S.K. Kohli, Advocate appeared for the appellants. Revenue was represented by Shri Vijay Singh, SDR. 3. The ld. Advocate stated that their product was a flavoured pan chatni in which sugar content was about 95 to 97%, and flavours were from 3 to 5%. Their price was Rs. 23.40 for 200 gms. The product had no other use and is only taken with the Pan . He pleaded that their product was classifiable under ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r chewing. Chewing tobacco is added when pan with tobacco is demanded. Gulkand is placed in the pan when sweet pan is demanded. The product of the appellants Pan Chatni is used when sweetened pan is required by the customer. It contains sugar syrup (95 to 97%), silver leaves, flavours, etc. Sugar syrup is generally prepared by dissolving sugar in water at a certain temperature with the addition of certain chemicals to remove odours and colour and for preservation. It is mentioned as excisable goods under sub-heading No. 1702.30 of the Tariff. The finished product was packed under the brand names - `Gopal Dil Khush and Gopal Rachna . Now, main point for our consideration is whether the product named as Pan Chatni is a chatni , class ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ke the sauce and the ketchup, as not having the essence of the characteristics of an accompaniment to the eatables with regard to the sum and substance of the nature of the raw materials, way of preparation, usage, packing and commercial understanding. The commercial understanding in the present context will be the understanding by the particular trade and the consumer where sauce and ketchup known and traded and consumed on the one hand, and the product under consideration is known and traded and consumed on the other. 7. In the case of M/s. Oswal Agro Mills Ltd. and Others v. CCE - 1993 AIR SCW 1782, the Hon ble Supreme Court had observed as under : The provisions of the Tariff do not determine the relevant entity of the goods. They ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y give to his wares. It is a well settled principle that excisability of an item to tax or tax deduction can hardly be made to depend on the label given to it by the parties. Simply because the manufacturer had named his product as `Pan Chatni it does not become a Chatni as commonly understood. Any reference to chatni brings to mind such indigenous eatables as pakoras, samosas, idli, dosa, dhokla, alu tikki, etc. It is a spicy preparation for relishing the eatables and is generally made of fruits, vegetables, herbs, pepper and other masalas. The product before us is not associated with eatables. Reference to chatni, chatni placed in the company of sauce and ketchup is only to that which is an accompaniment to the eatables. 9. In Ram Av ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... SC), the Hon ble Supreme Court had held that exemption being in the nature of exception, was to be construed strictly at the stage of determination whether assessee falls within its terms or not and in case of doubt, or ambiguity, benefit of it must go to the State. Further, exemption notification could not change the classification of the goods from one entry to another as held by the Supreme Court in the case of Eskayef Ltd. v. CCE - 1990 (49) E.L.T. 649 (SC). 13. Sub-heading No. 2107.91 is wide enough to cover such a product. Tariff Heading No. 2107 as before the 1995 Budget is extracted below : [E.L.T. Vol. 79 (Part-lV) (15th October, 1995) Page No. 606 Heading No. Sub-Heading No. Description of Goods 21 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... -rule (5) reads : (5) When the dispute about the rate of duty has been finalised or for any other reasons affecting rate or rates of duty, a modification of the rate or rates of duty is necessitated, the proper officer shall make such modification and inform the assessee accordingly. It may be noted that before revising his order dated March 5, 1976, the Assistant Collector gave a notice to the appellant stating the grounds on which he proposed to revise and modify his earlier order. The decision cited by Sri Uttam Reddy in support of this submission viz., Collector of Central Excise v. Pallappa (1964 Madras 111) has no relevance whatsoever. That was a case where the appellate authority set aside the order of the original authority le ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
