Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : M/s. Pleasantime Products and Anr Vs Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai-I (Supreme Court of India)
Appeal Number : Civil Appeal Nos. 4309- 4311 of 2008
Date of Judgement/Order : 12/11/2009
Related Assessment Year :
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored

This batch of civil appeals filed by the assessee involves common issue of classification of branded word game “Scrabble” – whether the product “Scrabble” is classifiable under sub-heading 9503.00 or sub-heading 9504.90 of the First Schedule to the Central Excise and Tariff Act, 1985

“Scrabble” will not fall in the category or class mentioned in sub-heading 9503.00, namely, “puzzles of all kinds”.(Para 14)

“Scrabble” is a board game. It is not a puzzle. In the circumstances, it falls under Heading 95.04 and not under sub-heading 9503.00 of the CETA.(Para 18) going by the dictionary meanings of the word “educational toy” one finds that “educational toys” remain even today tools of amusement. They remain an object for a child to play with. One needs to apply the predominant test in such cases. Applying these tests, we are of the view that even a “Junior Scrabble” will not fall in the category of “educational toys”. As stated earlier, the two main elements of “Scrabble” are – chance and skill. These elements are absent in a toy. Hence even a “Junior Scrabble” is not an educational toy. It is a game. It remains a board game and in the context of the placement of the entries in Chapter 95 which we have discussed above, in our view, even “Junior Scrabble” will come under Chapter Heading 95.04 of the CETA. (Para 21)

we find that in the declaration(s) even though the assessee had doubts about the excisability of the said item and even though the assessee had sought clarification as far back on 5th September, 1994; they did not mention the word “Scrabble” in the body of the declaration(s) filed with the Department. They did not mention the details of the game “Scrabble”. Therefore, this conduct of the assessee clearly indicates that the assessee herein deliberately declared branded goods under sub-heading 9403.00 of the CETA to avoid any enquiry in the matter by the Department. For the above reasons, we are of the view that the Department was justified in invoking the proviso to Section 11A (1) of the 1944 Act.(Para 22)

 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.

Sponsored

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Sponsored
Sponsored
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
August 2024
M T W T F S S
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031