“As has been stated by us above, ‘means’ ‘and includes’ is a legislative device by which the ‘includes’ part brings by way of extension various persons, categories, or things which would not otherwise have been included in the ‘means’ part. If this is so, obviously both parts cannot be read conjunctively. What is in the ‘includes’ part is relatable only to the subject that is to be defined and takes within its sweep persons, objects, or things which are not included in the first part. Further, the word ‘and’ which joins the two parts of the definition is not rendered meaningless. It is necessary because it precedes the word ‘includes’ and brings in to the definition clause persons, objects, or things that would not otherwise be included within the ‘means’ part.”
– Hon’ble Justice R.F. Nariman, Commissioner of Central Excise v. M/s. Detergents India Ltd., [Civil Appeal No. 7495 of 2004].