1987 (6) TMI 333

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... icals claimed drawback in respect of Absorbent Cotton Wool and certain other products exported by them. We are concerned in this case with their claim in respect of Absorbent Cotton Wool only. The same was rejected by the Asstt. Collector under his order dated 27-4-1981 holding that absorbent cotton wool cannot be considered either as drug or drug intermediary or pharmaceutical. The appeal against .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... umption that the product exported was absorvent cotton wool BPC. A question is whether the same would be drug or drug intermediary. 4. The Bombay High Court had to consider in the case of Leukoplast (India) Pvt. Ltd. (1985 Vol. 20 E.L.T. 70) the question whether the adhesive dressing called handyplast consisting of an adhesive tape with an antiseptic pad was a drug for purposes of classification .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X