Distell Limited v Commisioner for the South African Revenue Service (16910/2009) [2011] ZAGPPHC 83; 73 SATC 265 (2 June 2011)

Distell Limited v Commisioner for the South African Revenue Service (16910/2009) [2011] ZAGPPHC 83; 73 SATC 265 (2 June 2011)

The court found that the products in issue are not wine or fermented beverages but spirituous beverages. The manufacturing process involves stripping wine of its taste and flavour, fortifying it with cane spirits, and adding colourants, flavourants, and sweeteners, resulting in new products that have lost the organoleptic characteristics of wine. Applying the General Rules of Interpretation, the essential character of the products is given by the spirits, not the wine. Tariff Headings 22.04, 22.05, and 22.06 are not applicable. The products must be classified under Tariff Heading 2208.90.20. The application for further affidavits was granted due to special circumstances and absence of...

Citation
[2011] ZAGPPHC 83
Parties
Applicant: Distell Limited; Respondent: Commisioner for the South African Revenue Service
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
2 June 2011
Case Number
16910/2009
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment After Hearing on Merits and Interlocutory Applications
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs; application for further affidavits granted; striking out application refused except for one affidavit.
Judges
Pretorius
Legal Topics
Customs and Excise Act, Tariff Classification, Admission of Further Affidavits, Striking Out Application
Tax Law Civil Procedure Customs and Excise Act Tariff Classification Admission of Further Affidavits Striking Out Application

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 6 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Distell Limited

Applicant

Commisioner for the South African Revenue Service

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Judgment After Hearing on Merits and Interlocutory Applications

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the products manufactured by the applicant are correctly classified under Tariff Heading 2208.90.20 as spirituous beverages or should be classified under alternative headings as wine-based aperitifs or fermented beverages.
  2. 2 Whether the respondent's tariff determinations should be set aside and replaced with alternative tariff headings.
  3. 3 Whether further affidavits should be admitted into evidence.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the products in issue are not wine or fermented beverages but spirituous beverages. The manufacturing process involves stripping wine of its taste and flavour, fortifying it with cane spirits, and adding colourants, flavourants, and sweeteners, resulting in new products that have lost the organoleptic characteristics of wine. Applying the General Rules of Interpretation, the essential character of the products is given by the spirits, not the wine. Tariff Headings 22.04, 22.05, and 22.06 are not applicable. The products must be classified under Tariff Heading 2208.90.20. The application for further affidavits was granted due to special circumstances and absence of...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs; application for further affidavits granted; striking out application refused except for one affidavit.

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed with costs, including costs consequent upon the employment of two counsel.
  • The application for filing further affidavits is granted, no order as to costs.