Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2015 (5) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (5) TMI 286 - AT - Central ExciseRectification of mistake - Held that:- It is a matter of interpretation as to the meaning of the words 'juice concentrate', lime etc. On the contention that the PFA criteria was not under consideration in the Order-in-Original, we find that the Tribunal has discussed the matter with reference to a technical note produced by them during the course of arguments. There appears to be no mistake apparent on record. - Tribunal order did considered the judgment of Parle Agro Pvt. Ltd. (2008 (3) TMI 67 - CESTAT NEW DELHI) and distinguished it by stating that in the case of Parle the product 'Appy Fizz contained far more and higher significant percentage of apple juice i.e. 23%.- alone. The decision of the Tribunal is based on the totality of various factors including, most importantly, on the HSN Notes on which the Central Excise Tariff is based. There can be no objection to referring to the description given in the advertisement material because any consumer who buys the product would be guided by the description of the contents given on the packaging of the product. In this case, the description on the product did use the word 'Lemonade'. Similarly when there is doubt as to the classification of a common product reference to a standard encyclopedia such as Britannica may be made for guidance and to remove doubts. - Rectification denied.
|