Crown Chickens (Pty) Ltd v Minister of Finance and Others
Jurisdiction | South Africa |
Citation | 1996 (4) SA 389 (E) |
Crown Chickens (Pty) Ltd v Minister of Finance and Others
1996 (4) SA 389 (E)
1996 (4) SA p389
Citation |
1996 (4) SA 389 (E) |
Case No |
2221/94 |
Court |
Eastern Cape Division |
Judge |
Jones J |
Heard |
December 8, 1994 |
Judgment |
January 3, 1995 |
Counsel |
M J Lowe for the applicant. |
Flynote : Sleutelwoorde B
Revenue — Customs and excise — Customs and Excise Act 91 of 1964 — Such Act of general application across wide spectrum of commodities — Not sort of legislation having limited technical application or requiring special C understanding of technical language and usage — 'Carcass' and 'cuts' in Harmonized Customs and Excise Tariff not technical or specialised words used in technical or specialised setting — Such words to be given ordinary meaning — No room for expert evidence of such meaning — 'Carcass' with reference to D butchers meaning 'the whole trunk of a slaughtered animal, after removal of the head, limbs, and offal' — 'Cut' with reference to meat is 'a piece of anything cut off' and includes result of cutting up carcass into different pieces.
Revenue — Customs and excise — Package containing carcass cut up into six pieces — Classification of for customs duty — Importer of frozen mutton purchasing whole carcass but cutting it up into six pieces for packaging and E shipping-Whether package containing such pieces classifiable under item 0204.41 of Harmonized Customs and Excise Tariff as 'frozen carcasses and half-carcasses', or under item 0204.42 as 'other cuts of mutton with bone in' — Chapter 2 of harmonised tariff distinguishing between carcasses (ie body of F animal with or without head), half-carcasses (lengthwise splitting of carcasses), quarters, pieces, etc — Carcass cut up into six different pieces of frozen meat can never be 'the whole trunk of a slaughtered animal, after removal of the head, limbs, and offal' — Trunk specifically and deliberately distinguished from half a trunk and from other pieces of meat with bone — Holding otherwise defying plain G meaning of words in context — Package containing carcass cut up into six pieces classifiable under item 0204.42 of tariff as 'other cuts of mutton with bone in'.
Headnote : Kopnota
H The applicant, an importer of frozen mutton, had purchased whole carcasses of frozen mutton in Australia, but in order to package and ship the carcasses economically and efficiently, the shoulders and legs were cut off and the carcass was slit down the backbone so that it was in six separate pieces when it was packaged. In terms of item 0204.41 of the Brussels harmonised system of tariffs, known officially as I the 'Harmonized Customs and Excise Tariff', which was applied in South Africa and internationally, the excise duty on frozen 'carcasses and half-carcasses' of mutton was R1,50 per kg and in terms of item 0204.42 duty was levied on other 'cuts of mutton with bone in' at a rate of R4 per kg. The Commissioner for Customs and Excise had in terms of s 47(9)(a)(i) of the Customs and Excise Act 91 of 1964 determined that 'the carcasses having been cut otherwise than to the limit of the lengthwise splitting of a carcass they are classified within tariff subheading 0204.42 as "other cuts with bone in" '. The applicant appealed to a Provincial Division in terms of s 47(9)(b) and (e) of the Act against the Commissioner's determination. In J
1996 (4) SA p390
A order to establish that the package containing a carcass which had been cut up into six pieces remained a carcass within the meaning of item 0204.41 of the tariff, the applicant had annexed to its founding affidavit a letter from an officer in the Australian Customs Services indicating that his department classified frozen mutton carcasses under item 0204.41 irrespective of whether they had been cut into six pieces or not, as B well as letters from the South African Meat Board and the Australian exporter which had been to similar effect. The applicant had also annexed three affidavits by expert witnesses in the meat industry, ie a livestock agent, a farmer and agricultural economist and the manager of an abattoir who confirmed its standpoint as being in conformity with ordinary usage in the meat industry. The applicant contended that, because the C tariff dealt with specialised and technical material using technical terminology, evidence from expert witnesses was admissible to explain the technical meanings of the language it used and that the affidavits by the three experts in the meat industry were admissible opinion. It submitted that they proved that the word 'carcass' could include a carcass which had been cut into six pieces, and that in the usage in the meat industry the word 'cuts' referred to specific cuts of meat which had been made ready for purchase by a retail customer, and not the large pieces of carcass imported by the applicant.
Held, that the applicant's contention was unsound as many of the items made dutiable in the tariff were no doubt also the subject of specialised trades or industries where D technical words were employed, but the Customs and Excise Act was an Act of general application across an extremely wide spectrum of commodities and was not the sort of legislation which had limited technical application or which required a special understanding of technical language and usage. (At 394H/I-I/J.)
Held, further, that the words 'carcass' and 'cuts' were not technical or specialised words used in a technical or specialised setting and had therefore to be given their E ordinary meaning. Accordingly there was no room for expert evidence of what they meant. (At 395F.)
The dictum in Kommissaris van Doeane en Aksyns v Mincer Motors Bpk 1959 (1) SA 114 (A) at 121C-D applied.
Held, further, that, in order to decide the meaning of the words or phrases 'carcass', 'half-carcass' and 'cuts of meat with bone in' where they appeared in items 0204.41 F and 0204.42, the legislation as a whole had to be looked at with reference to its context, and effect had to be given to the plain meaning of the words chosen by the Legislature to give expression to its intention in the light of their context. (At 396A/B-B/C.)
Held, further, that in terms of The Oxford English Dictionary the word carcass with regard to butchers meant 'the whole trunk of a slaughtered animal, after removal of the head, limbs and offal': the note on chap 2 of the harmonised tariff stated that the G chapter 'applies to meat in carcasses (ie the body of an animal with or without the head), half-carcasses (resulting from the lengthwise splitting of a carcass), quarters, pieces etc.' (At 396B/C-D/E.)
Held, further, that the tariff imposed different duties on carcasses, half-carcasses, cuts with bone in and on boneless meat and this difference in the duty underlined the distinction in the different kinds of meat which were classified: this distinction was the H basis for the argument that once a carcass was cut up into pieces it stopped being a carcass within the meaning of the tariff and that to hold otherwise would make nonsense of the difference between a carcass, and a half-carcass which resulted from the lengthwise splitting of a carcass. It also made nonsense of the difference between a carcass, and a half-carcass and other cuts of frozen mutton with bone in. (At 396D/E-F/G.)
Held, further, that the dictionary meaning of the word 'cut', with reference to meat, was 'a piece of anything cut off; esp of meat, a slice'; and included the result of cutting up a I carcass into a number of different pieces. (At 396G.)
Held, further, that it mattered not that the applicant intended that a carcass remained a carcass after it had been cut up: the question was whether or not it was still a carcass, objectively speaking, when the Controller of Customs and Excise was called upon to levy excise duty on it. (At 396H/I-I/J.)
Held, accordingly, that six different pieces of frozen meat which once made up the carcass of a single sheep before it was cut up, could never be 'the whole trunk of a slaughtered animal, after removal of the head, limbs, and offal' (the dictionary J
1996 (4) SA p391
A meaning of the word 'carcass'), especially when the trunk was specifically and deliberately distinguished from half a...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Distell Limited v The Commissioner for the South African Revenue Services
...are matters of law which exclusively fall within the domain of the court. (Crown Chickens (Pty) Ltd. v Minister of Finance and Others 1996 (4) SA 389 (E) at 394 I - 395 H; National Screen Print (Pty) Ltd v Minister of Finance 1978 (3) SA 501 (C) at 506 A - 507 B; International Business Mach......
-
Kemtek Imaging Systems Ltd v Commissioner for Customs and Excise
...(B-D). National Screen Point (Pty) Ltd v Minister of Finance 1978 3 SA 501(C). Crown Chickens (Pty) Ltd v Minister of Finance and Others 1996 4 SA 389(E). I turn to the question as to which is the correct tariff heading under which the imported product should be classified, regard being had......
-
SA Historical Mint (Pty) Ltd v Minister of Finance and Another
... ... The following cases were cited in the judgment of the Court: ... Crown Chickens (Pty) Ltd v Minister of Finance and Others 1996 (4) SA 389 (E) ... International ... ...
-
Commissioner for Customs and Excise v Capital Meats CC (In Liquidation) and Another
...Inland Revenue v Southern Life Association Ltd 1986 (4) SA 717 (A) at 723H—I Crown Chickens (Pty) Ltd v Minister of Finance and Others 1996 (4) SA 389 (E) at 394I—395H F Kommissaris van Doeane en Aksyns v Mincer Motors Bpk 1959 (1) SA 114 (A) at Marquis of Camden v Inland Revenue Commission......
-
Distell Limited v The Commissioner for the South African Revenue Services
...are matters of law which exclusively fall within the domain of the court. (Crown Chickens (Pty) Ltd. v Minister of Finance and Others 1996 (4) SA 389 (E) at 394 I - 395 H; National Screen Print (Pty) Ltd v Minister of Finance 1978 (3) SA 501 (C) at 506 A - 507 B; International Business Mach......
-
Kemtek Imaging Systems Ltd v Commissioner for Customs and Excise
...(B-D). National Screen Point (Pty) Ltd v Minister of Finance 1978 3 SA 501(C). Crown Chickens (Pty) Ltd v Minister of Finance and Others 1996 4 SA 389(E). I turn to the question as to which is the correct tariff heading under which the imported product should be classified, regard being had......
-
SA Historical Mint (Pty) Ltd v Minister of Finance and Another
... ... The following cases were cited in the judgment of the Court: ... Crown Chickens (Pty) Ltd v Minister of Finance and Others 1996 (4) SA 389 (E) ... International ... ...
-
Commissioner for Customs and Excise v Capital Meats CC (In Liquidation) and Another
...Inland Revenue v Southern Life Association Ltd 1986 (4) SA 717 (A) at 723H—I Crown Chickens (Pty) Ltd v Minister of Finance and Others 1996 (4) SA 389 (E) at 394I—395H F Kommissaris van Doeane en Aksyns v Mincer Motors Bpk 1959 (1) SA 114 (A) at Marquis of Camden v Inland Revenue Commission......