http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 8  

PETITIONER: G. CLARIDGE AND COMPANY LIMITED

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE, PUNE

DATE OF JUDGMENT12/02/1991

BENCH: AGRAWAL, S.C. (J) BENCH: AGRAWAL, S.C. (J) SHETTY, K.J. (J)

CITATION:  1991 SCR  (1) 317        1991 SCC  (2) 229  JT 1991 (1)   394        1991 SCALE  (1)188

ACT:      Central  Excises and  Salt  Act,  1944/Central   Excise Rules,   1944/  Central  Excise  Tariff  Act,  1985:   First Schedule,   Item    No.    17    &    Notification     dated 28.2.1982/Rule  8(1)/Chapter  48,   Heading   48.18:   ’Egg trays’-Whether regarded as ’containers’.      Statutory  Interpretation:  Two or  more  words-Coupled together   susceptible of  analogous  meaning-Interpretation of.      Words and Phrases: ’Containers’-Meaning of.

HEADNOTE:      The  appellant was a manufacturer  of  egg  trays   and other   similar  items. Before the introduction  of  Central Excise   Tariff   Act,  1985  (new  Tariff)  effective  from 1.3.1986, Central Excise and Salt  Act,  1944  (old  Tariff) was  applicable to the relevant products.   The   appellant, classifying its product under Item 68 of the old Tariff, was paying   duty  accordingly. By Notification  dated  February 28, 1982,  issued  under  Rule  8(1) of the  Central  Excise Rules,  1944,  the  Central  Government  exempted   articles of paper and paper-board falling under  Item  17(4)  of  the old  Tariff.  The appellant filed a  revised  classification list  for  its  products seeking classification  under  item 17(4).   The   Asstt.  Collector,  Central Excise  held  the products  classifiable as ’articles of pulp’ under Item   68 of the old Tariff, and the appellant  was  required  to  pay excise  duty accordingly.      On  appeal,  the  Collector  (Appeals)   reversed   the order   of   the  Asstt.  Collector,  and  held  that    the products   were   made   out   of   waste  paper  and   were classifiable under Item 17(4) as  ’articles  of  paper   and paper-board’.   The   Revenue  filed  appeals   before   the Customs,   Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal.      On   introduction    of    the    new    Tariff,    the appellant    classified    the   relevant    products     as ’containers’    under   sub-heading   4818.19   and  claimed exemption. The  Asstt.  Collector  held  that  the  products were  not  ’containers’  but  were   ’articles   of    pulp’ falling    under    sub-heading  4819.90   and   accordingly chargeable to duty. Setting  aside  the  order  in                                                        318

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 8  

appeal, the Collector  held that the products were  ’packing containers’ and classifiable under sub-heading 4818.19.      The  Revenue  appealed before the  Appellate  Tribunal, which  allowed  all the appeals by a  common  judgment,  but remanded  the matter to the Collector (Appeals) with  regard to the recovery for a certain period.      In the assessee’s appeal to this Court it was contended that  the ‘egg  trays’ manufactured by  the  appellant  were ’containers’  under  Item  17  and  Heading  48.18  of   the respective   Tariffs;  that  merely  because  the  egg  tray was described as a tray  does  not  mean  that  it  was  not a   container;  and  that it was   not   required   that   a container  should  be  closed from all sides.      On   the   question  whether:  egg  trays   and   other similar    products  manufactured  by  the   appellant   are ’containers’   falling  under  Item  No. 17(4) or  17(3)  of the First Schedule to the  Central  Excises  and  Salt  Act, 1944  and  Heading 48.18 of the Central Excise  Tariff  Act, 1985.       Dismissing the appeals, this Court,      HELD: 1. 1 ’Egg trays’  being  receptacles  which   are not    covered    or  enclosed   cannot    be    used    for transportation   of  articles  and  cannot  be  regarded  as ’containers’  under Item  17  of  the  First   Schedule   to Central Excise  and  Salt  Act,  1944  and  Heading    48.18 of    the   Schedule   to Central Excise Tariff  Act,  1985. [326B]      1.2   Moulded  pulp  egg  trays  containing  the   eggs are   put    in    a  standard case  for  the   purpose   of transport.   The  case  in  which  the  egg trays  are  put, are ’containers’ and not the ’egg trays’ itself. [326E-F]      1.3  The  expression ’container’ is  used     in  three different   senses:    in  a   broad   sense,    it    means a receptacle  which  contains;  in   a   narrower sense,  it means  a  receptacle  in  which  articles  are  covered   or enclosed  and transported; and in  a  more  limited   sense, it   means   enclosures   used in shipping  or  railway  for transport  of  goods.   If   used   in   a   broad    sense, ‘container’  would  include  a  tray   because   it   is   a receptacle  which  contains articles and, therefore, an  egg tray would  be  a  ’container’.  But  an egg tray would  not be a ’container’  in  a  narrower  sense  because   articles placed  in  it  are not covered   or   enclosed   and   they cannot  be  transported as such. [325D-F]                                                        319      1.4  In item 17  of  the  First  Schedule  to   Central Excises   and  Salt Act, 1944  the  word   ’containers’   is preceded    by    the   words   ’boxes, cartons,  bags   and other  packing’  and  in  Heading  48.18  of  the   Schedule to   Central   Excise   Tariff  Act,    1985,    the    word ’containers’   is  preceded  by the words  ’cartons,  boxes’ and  is followed by the words ’and cases’.  Considering  the expression  ’containers’ in the context  in  which   it   is used  in  the relevant tariff items, the   said   expression has   to   be  construed  to   mean   ’packing   containers’ which  are  analogous  to   boxes   and   cartons, that  is, an  enclosed receptacle which  can  be  used   for   storage and  transportation of articles. [325G, 326A-B]      Webster’s    New    Collegiate     Dictionary,     1975 Chambers’    20th Century   Dictionary   Indian    Standard- Glossary    of    Terms   Glossary    of   Packaging   Terms (USA)  Glossary   of   Packaging   Terms   (Australia)   New Encyclopedia Britannica, referred to. 2.   It   is   a   well-accepted    canon    of    statutory construction   that   when two   or   more    words    which

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 8  

are   susceptible   of   analogous   meaning   are   coupled together  they  are   understood  to  be   used   in   their cognate  sense. It is based on the principle that words take as  it  were  their  colour  from each other, that is,  more general  is restricted  to  a  sense  analogous  to  a  less general. [325G-H, 326A) Dr.  Devendra  M.  Surti  v.  State  of  Gujarat,  [1969]  1 SCR 235, relied on.

JUDGMENT:      CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal Nos.  160-63 of 1990.      From   the   Order  dated  25.9.89  of   the    Customs Excise    and   Gold (Control)  Appellate   Tribunal,    New Delhi    in   Appeal   No.   E/1883/85-C,  E/2031/85-C,   E/ 1468/88-C   and  E/  1986/88-C  (Order  No.    543-546    of 1989-C).      M.L.  Lahoty, Mrs. Meeta Sharma and P.S. Jha  (NP)  for the Appellant.      M.   Chander  Sekaran,  Additional  Solicitor   General (N.P.).  M.  Gouri Shanker Murthy, G. Venkatesh Rao  and  P. Parameshwaran for the Respondent.      The Judgment of the Court was delivered by                                                        320      S.C. AGRAWAL, J. These appeals raise for  consideration the  question   as   to  whether  egg   trays   and    other similar    products   manufactured  by  the  appellant   can be  regarded  as  ’Containers’  under  the  relevant entries in the Central Excise Tariff.      Till  February  28,   1986  the   excise   tariff   was contained   in   the   First  Schedule   to   the    Central Excises  and  Salt  Act,  1944   (hereinafter   referred  to as  ’the  old  Tariff’)  and  with  effect  from  March   1, 1986,   the excise  tariff  is  contained  in  the  Schedule to   the  Central  Excise  Tariff Act,   1985   (hereinafter referred   to   as  ’the   new   Tariff).    The    relevant entry  in  the  old  Tariff  was   Item   17.   During   the period  March  1,  1982  to February, 1983, the said Item 17 read thus:           "Paper    and    paper    board,     all     sorts           (including    paste-board,  mill   board,    straw           board,   cardboard   and   corrugated   board) and           articles  thereof  specified  below,  in   or   in           relation   to   the manufacture   of   which   any           process   is   ordinarily   carried   on with  the           aid of power-           (1)    Uncoated   and   coated    printing     and           writing   paper   (other than poster paper)           (2)    Paper  board and all other kinds  of  paper           (including  paper  or  paper  boards  which   have           been   subjected   to   various treatments such as           coating,  impregnating, corrugation,  creping  and           design printing), not elsewhere specified.                (a)   All  sorts of paper commonly  known  as           Kraft  paper, including paper and paper  board  of           the  type  known  as Kraft  liner  or  corrugating           medium,  of a substance equal to or exceedings  65           gram per square metre in each case.                (b) Others.           (3)    Carbon and other copying papers  (including           duplicator stencils) and transfer papers,  whether           or  not cut to size and whether or not put  up  in           boxes.

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 4 of 8  

         (4)   Boxes,  cartons,  bags  and  other   packing           containers (including flattened or folded cartons,           whether  or not printed and whether  in  cartons),           whether or not printed and whether in assembled or           unassembled conditions."                                                        321 Item  68  of the old Tariff was in the nature  of  residuary entry.      By  notification  No.  66/82-CE  dated   February   28, 1982,    the   Central  Government,  in  exercise   of   the powers  conferred  by  sub-rule   (1)   of rule  8  of   the Central   Excise   Rules,   1944,   exempted   articles   of paper   or  paper-board falling  under   sub-item   (4)   of item   17   of  the  old  Tariff  from the  whole   of   the duty    of    excise   leviable    thereon.     The     said exemption  was,   however,   not   applicable   to   printed boxes    and   printed   cartons (including   flattened   or folded    printed    boxes   and   flattened    or    folded printed   cartons)  whether  in  assembled  or   unassembled condition.      With   effect   from  March   1,    1983,    Item    17 was   substituted   and during the  period  March  1,   1983 to  February  28,  1986,  it  read  as  under:                     c           "Paper    and    Paper    board,     all     sorts           (including       pasteboard,     mill       board,           strawboard,      cardboard     and      corrugated           board), and articles thereof specified  below,  in           or   in  relation  to  the manufacture  of   which           any  process   is   ordinarily   carried   on with           the  aid  of  power-           (1)   Paper  board  and  all   other   kinds    of           paper   (including paper  or  paper  boards  which           have   been   subjected   to   various  treatments           such        as       coating,        impregnating,           corrugation,  creping  and design  printing),  not           elsewhere specified.           (2)    Carbon   and    other    copying     papers           (including    duplicator  stencils)  and  transfer           papers, whether or not put up in boxes.           (3)    Boxes,    cartons,    bags    and    ’Other           packing     containers (including   flattened   or           folded    boxes   and   flattened    or     folded           cartons),    whether   or   not    printed     and           whether      in     assembled    or    unassembled           conditions."      In  the  new Tariff, the relevant entry  under  Heading 48.18 in Chapter 48 is as follows:                     G ------------------------------------------------------------ "48.18    OTHER  ARTICLES OF PAPER PULP, PAPER.  PAPERBOARD,           CELLULOSE  WADDING  OR WEES OF CELLULOSE FIBRES:           Cartons,    boxes,    containers     and     cases (including   flattened or  folded  boxes  and  flattened  or folded    cartons),    whether in assembled  or  unassembled condition:                                                        322 4818.11   Intended for packing of match sticks 4818.12   Printed cartons, boxes, containers and cases, made           wholly out of paper or paper-board of heading  No.           or   sub-heading  No.  48.04,   4805.11,   4806.19,           4807.91, 4807.92, 48.08 or 4811.10, as the case may           be 4818.13   Other printed cartons, boxes and cases 4818.19   Other"

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 5 of 8  

------------------------------------------------------------ 4818.20   Toilet   tissues,  handkerchiefs   and   cleansing           tissues of paper 4818.90    Other." ------------------------------------------------------------ On  products falling under sub-Heading 4818.19,  the  excise duty was nill whereas on products falling under  sub-Heading 4818.90, the excise duty was payable at the rate of 12%.      M/s.   G. Claridge & Company Ltd. the appellant  herein manufactures  (i) egg filler flats, (ii) egg cartons,  (iii) tube light packing trays, (iv) duck egg trays and (v)  apple trays.   It filed a classification list for the above  goods effective from April 1, 1981 classifying the products  under Item  68  of the old Tariff and it was paying  duty  at  the prevailing  rate under Item 68.  After the  introduction  of the revised Item 17 with effect from February 28, 1982/March 1,  1982, the said appellant filed a revised  classification list  effective  from March 1, 1982 for the  aforesaid  five products   seeking  classification  under  Item  17(4)   and claiming  full  exemption  from central  excise  duty  under notification  dated February 28, 1982.  This  classification list  was  approved by the Assistant  Collector  of  Central Excise,  Pune  Division  on  March  11,  1982,  but  on  re- examination  Department felt that the said products did  not merit  classification under Item 17(4) but under Item 68  of the old Tariff and a show cause notice dated May 4, 1984 was issued.  After considering the reply of the appellant to the said  show cause notice, the Assistant Collector of  Central Excise, Pune Division passed an order dated January 28, 1985 whereby  he  held  that  ’egg  trays’  manufactured  by  the appellant  were correctly classifiable under Item 68 of  the old  Tariff and not under Item 17(4) and the  appellant  was required to pay central excise duty at the appropriate  rate leviable on all types of egg trays manufactured and  cleared from  its unit during the period of six months prior to  the notice  dated May 4, 1984.  The Assistant Collector  was  of the  view  that the articles manufactured by  the  appellant were articles manufactured directly from the pulp and  were, therefore, classifiable as ’articles of pulp’ under Item 68. The said order of the Assistant Collector  was  reversed  in appeal  by  the  Collector  of   Central   Excise                                                        323 (Appeals)  by  his  order  dated  April  30,  1985  on   the view   that   the products  manufactured  by  the  appellant were    made    out   of   waste    paper  and   they   were classifiable   under  Item  17(4)  as  ’articles  of   paper and paper-board’.  Feeling  aggrieved  by  the  said   order of   the   Collector (Appeals), the Department filed appeals Nos.   E/1883/85-C and E/2031/85-C  before   the    Customs, Excise     and    Gold    (Control)     Appellate   Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as ’the Appellate Tribunal’).      After   the  introduction  of  the  new   Tariff   with effect   from   March  1,  1986,  the  appellants  filed   a classification   list   classifying   their   products    as ’containers’   falling   under   sub-heading   4818.19    of the    new Tariff and  since  no  duty  was  payable   under the  said  sub-heading,  the appellants  claimed   exemption from  payment  of   excise   duty   on   their products. The said  classification  list was  approved  provisionally  but subsequently   the  Assistant  Collector,  Central    Excise issued   a   show  cause  notice  dated  October  16,   1986 proposing   to   classify   the    goods  under  sub-heading 4818.90   chargeable  to  duty  @  12% ad   valorem.   After considering the reply to the said show  cause  notice,   the Asstt.  Collector,  Central Excise, by  his   orders   dated

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 6 of 8  

April   15,  1987  and  July 1, 1987 held that the  products manufactured by the appellant were     not ’containers’  but were  ’articles  of   pulp’   falling   under    sub-heading 4818.90.   The   said   orders  were  set   aside   by   the Collector   of   Central  Excise (Appeals)  by  his   orders dated  March  22,  t988  and  June  6,  1988. The  Collector (Appeals)   held   that  the  products    manufactured    by the    appellant    were    ’packing     containers’     and classifiable    under     sub-heading    orders    of    the Collector    (Appeals),  4818.19. Feeling aggrieved  by  the Department   filed    appeals    before    the     Appellate Tribunal    which  were   registered   as    Appeals    Nos. E/1468/88-C   and   E/1986/88-C. All the above four  appeals were  disposed by the  Appellate  Tribunal  by  a common order   whereby  the  said  appeals  were    allowed.    The Appellate  Tribunal  held  that  the  products  manufactured by    the   appellant    cannot  come  within    the    sub- classification    below    containers    and    were     not classifiable   under   sub-heading    4818.19    but    were classifiable  under  sub-head-ing 4818.90 of the new  Tariff and   similarly   they  were  not  classifiable  under  item 17(4)  or  17(3)  of   the   old   Tariff.   The   Appellate Tribunal   was  also  of  the   view   that   the   products manufactured   by   the  appellant  are  articles  of  paper because  starting  raw  materials  is   waste   paper.   The Appellate   Tribunal  has  held  that  the   duty   demanded by   the   Assistant Collector for six months prior  to  the issue  of  show  cause  notice  dated May  4,  1984,   i.e., from  November  4,  1983  is  legally  sustainable  and with regard  to recovery of the duty for the earlier period  from March 1,  1982  by  invoking  the  proviso  to  Section  11- A(l)  of  the Central  Excises  and  Salt  Act,  1944,   the Appellate     Tribunal     remanded   the  matter   to   the Collector (Appeals)  for  considering  the  said  question.                                                        324      The  question which arises for consideration  in  these appeals  is  whether  the  egg  trays  and   other   similar products  manufactured  by   the appellants are ’containers’ falling  under  Item  17(4)  of  17(3)  of  the  old  Tariff and sub-heading 4818.19 of the new Tariff.      The  learned counsel  for  the  appellant   has   urged that  the  products manufactured  by  it  are   ’containers’ and  in  support  of  this  submission the  learned  counsel has   invited   our  attention  to  the  meaning   of    the term   ’container’  as  contained   in   the    Dictionaries and    the   Indian Standard  Glossary  of  Terms   relating to    paper   or    paper-board,     packaging    materials, Glossary   of   Packaging   Terms   (USA)    and    Glossary of Packaging  Terms  (Australia).  The  submission  of   the learned   counsel    is that a ’container’ is  a  receptacle which   holds,   restrains   or  encloses  the  item  to  be stored or transported and  that  the  egg  tray  and   other similar  products   manufactured  by   the   appellant   are ’containers’    because   they are receptacles for  holding, storing  and  transporting  the  things  kept  in them.   It has  been  urged  that a  ’tray’  is   a   shallow   lidless container   and merely because an egg tray is described   as a   tray  does  not  mean  that  it  is not  a  ’container’. It  is contended that egg trays  are  so  designed   as   to protect   the  eggs  from  breakage  and  that   egg   trays provide   the   best mode  for  storage  and  transport   of eggs.   The   learned  counsel  has   submitted   that   the Appellate  Tribunal  was  in  error  in  proceeding  on  the basis   that   egg   tray   and   other   similar   products manufactured    by   the appellant cannot  be  regarded   as

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 7 of 8  

’containers’  because  when  a  single  egg tray is reversed or   turned  upside  down  or  tilted  sideways   vertically at  90%  angle,  the  contents   would   fall   down.    The submission   of   the learned counsel is  that  it  is   not required   that   a  container  should  be closed  from  all sides and that a container can also be open.      The  expression  ’container’  has  been  thus   defined in    the    dictionaries  and   Glossaries   of   Packaging Terms:           "Container:  One  that contains; a  receptacle  or           flexible covering for shipment of goods. (Abstract from Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary, 1975)           "Container:  that  which contains  that  in  which           goods are enclosed for transport. (Abstract from Chambers’ 20th Century Dictionary)           "Containers-Any receptacle which holds,  restrains           or                                                        325           encloses    any    article   or    commodity    or           articles    or    commodities  to  be  stored   or           transported. (Abstract from Indian Standard-Glossary of Terms: 1.8. 4261- 1967)           "Container.  (1)  In  general,   any    receptacle           or   enclosure used in  packaging  and   shipping.           (2)   Relatively  large,  reusable  enclosures  to           be  filled  with  smaller  packages  and  discrete           objects,   to  consolidate  shipments  and   allow           transport on railway flat cars, flatbed  trailers,           aircraft, in ships’  holds or    as     deckloads,           etc.  (See CARGO  TRANSPORTER;  CONTAINERIZATION).           (3)   Any  receptacle  for  holding  a   product." [Abstract from Glossary of Packaging Terms (USA)]           "Container. A large box for intermodal  transport,           containing many smaller boxes of different  shapes           and sizes as well as individual articles. [Abstract from Glossary of Packaging Terms (Australia)] The    above    definitions    would    show    that     the expression   ’container’ is used in three different  senses: in   a   broad   sense,   it   means   a  receptacle   which contains;  in  a  narrower  sense,  it  means  a  receptacle in   which   articles   are  covered   or    enclosed    and transported;   and   in   a more limited  sense,  it   means enclosure  used  in  shipping  or  railway  for transport of goods.  If  used  in  a  broad  sense,   ’container’   would include  a tray because it is a receptacle  which   contains articles   and,   therefore,  an  egg  tray   would   be   a ’container’.   But   an   egg   tray   would   not   be    a ’container’ in a  narrower  sense  because  articles  placed in   it  are  not covered  or  enclosed  and   they   cannot be  transported  as  such.  It   is,therefore, necessary  to ascertain  whether  the  expression  ’container’  in Item 17 of the old Tariff and  Heading  48.18  of  the  new   Tariff has   been  used  in  the  broad  sense   to   include   all receptacles   or   in   a  narrower sense  to   mean   those receptacles   in   which  the  articles   are   covered   or enclosed   and   transported.   For   this   purpose,    the context   in  which  the word ’container’ has been used   in these  entries  has  to  be  examined.  In Item 17  of   the old  Tariff,  the  word  ’containers’  is  preceded  by  the words   ’boxes,  cartons,  bags  and  other   packing’   and in   Heading    48.18  of   the   new   Tariff,   the   word ’containers’  is  preceded  by   the   words cartons, boxes’ and  is  followed by the  words  ’and  cases’.   It   is   a well-accepted   canon   of   statutory   construction   that

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 8 of 8  

when   two   or   more  words which   are   susceptible   of analogous  meaning  are  coupled  together   they                                                       326 are  understood  to be used in their cognate  sense.  It  is based  on  the principle that words take as  it  were  their colour  from  each  other,  that is,  the  more  general  is restricted to a sense analogous to a less general. [See: Dr. Davendra M Surti v. State of Gujarat, [1969] 1 SCR 235 at p. 240].   Considering  the  expression  ’containers’  in   the context in which it is used in the relevant tariff items, we are  of  the  opinion that the said  expression  has  to  be construed  to mean ’packing containers’ which are  analogous to boxes and cartons, that is, an enclosed receptacle  which can be used for storage and transportation of articles.  Egg trays  being receptacles which are not covered  or  enclosed cannot   be  used  for  transportation  of   articles   and, therefore, they cannot be regarded as ’containers’ under the abovementioned entries in the Excise Tariff. According to the New Encyclopaedia Britannica, the  practice followed in the various countries for the packaging of  eggs for  transport is as follows:           "Packaging.  For retail use in the United  States,           eggs  are  repackaged  in  dozen  and   half-dozen           paperboard  cartons. In some other countries  they           are packed with straw or excelsior in long  wooden           boxes.  In  many  parts of  the  world,  they  are           marketed  in baskets or boxes and  the  individual           eggs   are  sold   by  weight.  Several   European           countries stamp each egg with a date and number to           meet the import restrictions of other nations."                             [p. 444, Vol. 6,  1974  edition] The  Glossary  of  Packaging Terms  (USA)  also  shows  that moulded pulp egg trays are put in  a  standard  case   which indicates  that  the  egg trays containing the eggs are  put in a case  for  the  purpose  of  transport. In other words, the case in which the egg trays are put are ‘containers’ and not the ’egg tray’ itself.      For the reasons  aforesaid,  we  are  of  the   opinion that   the  Appellate Tribunal was right in taking the  view that    the   egg   trays   and   other  similar    products manufactured  by  the  appellant  cannot  be  regarded    as ‘containers’ under the relevant items of the Excise Tariff.      The  appeals,  therefore,  fail  and  are   accordingly dismissed.  There will be no orders as to costs. R. P.                                  Appeals    dismissed.                                                        327