TMI Blog1987 (10) TMI 196X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rred to therein were non-alcoholic beverage bases. The appellants replied denying the allegations. The show cause notice was revised under a subsequent Letter dated 16/18-10-1979, invoking the provisions of Rules 173PP(i), 173PP(iii), 173PP(vi) and 174 of the Central Excise Rules. After adjudication, the Collector of Central Excise, Bombay-I passed Order dated 29-12-1984 confirming the duty demand and further imposing a penalty of Rs. 25,000/-. This appeal is against the said order. 2. We have heard Shri J.R. Gagrat, Advocate, assisted by Shri C.M. Mehta and Shri R.C. Pandey, Advocates, for the appellants and Shri K.C. Sachar for the Department. 3. Shri Gagrat submitted that this issue as to the dutiability of non-alcoholic beverage bas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Notification No. 55/75 and, therefore, we should also hold that the non-alcoholic beverage bases in issue being beverages, in liquid form, would not be entitled to exemption under Notification No. 55/75. Thus the argument of Shri Sachar is that no beverage can be called a food since the Andhra Pradesh High Court had held so and that in the absence of any contrary decision of any High Court we should follow the said decision and dispose of the present appeal on that basis. 5. This question whether a beverage could be a food or a food product or a food preparation has been elaborately discussed in the judgment reported in 1987 (27) E.L.T. 349 and it had been held that beverages could also be food or food products or food preparations. As r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ence of any definition of the term in the Central Excise Tariff Schedule and Notification No. 55 of 75 as to what would be a food preparation reference was being made to CCCN. 7. In the said decision reference had been made to the Import Trade Policy of the Government of India for the period April 1981 to March 1982. Shri Sachar contended that even under that policy, coffee had been mentioned under the same heading but that in view of the Andhra Pradesh High Court judgment coffee would not be a food and hence the inclusion of non-alcoholic beverage bases under the said heading (foods) in Appendix 17 would not be relevant. While it is true that coffee had been held by the High Court to be not a food, that would not, for that reason, lead t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e on the ground that there is no definition of the expression food products and food preparations in the notification. We should in fact think that the opinions of the experts would be relevant and necessary to be considered precisely for the reason that there is no definition in the Act or the notification. If there is a definition of a term in the Act or rules in the certification, we will have to go by that definition only and not by opinions of the experts. In this case it is not disputed that there is no such definition. Therefore, the Collector was not correct in ignoring the opinion of Prof. Rege for the reason that there was no definition in the Act or the notification. So far as the opinion of the chemical examiner, the Collector ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
