Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2017 (3) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (3) TMI 1439 - AT - Central ExciseClassification of goods - Keshyog Oil and Keshyog Herbal Powder Hair Wash/Shampoo - Ayurvedic medicine under Chapter 30 or cosmetic/ toilet preparations under CETH 3305? - Held that: - classification of similar product came for examination before the Tribunal in CCE, Chandigarh vs. Saini Hair Products reported in [2003 (11) TMI 403 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI], where it was held that The product is made under a drug licence in accordance with an Ayurvedic Text and from Ayurvedic ingredients. It is packed and distributed in packings and with literature proclaiming it as Ayurvedic medicine. Some instructions are also given on the label about dosage, period, etc. The label also indicates the problems for which it is to be applied. As pointed out by the lower authorities, Tariff and HSN notes also advice classification of the product as a drug - the product, in question, are rightly classifiable under Chapter 30 as Ayurvedic Medical Preparation. Whether the process of labelling, packing undertaken by the appellant (M/s GTM/Global) will amount to manufacture or not? - Held that: - labelling of the products, packing from bulk cartons to combo boxes (with one oil and one shampoo container) and making them ready for retail market is carried out by M/s GTM/Global, in their premises. The cartons with 200 bottles received by GTM/Global are meant for inter-unit transfer in bulk and not for retail consumer. Such bulk consignments are made in to retail packs (combo packs with bottle of oil and powder) in a single retail carton box. This carton box is fit for retail sale undertaken by GTM/Global. Applying the provisions of Note 6 of Chapter 30, we find that the processes undertaken by the appellant will amount to manufacture attracting Central Excise levy. Personal Penalty on Shri Anuj Agarwal is Director of the appellant (GTM) - Held that: - The duty liability in this case arises, even after such classification, in view of deemed manufacture in terms of Chapter Note 6. In such situation alleging malafide intend to violate the provisions of central excise law against an individual, as officer of the appellant company, is not tenable. The original order did not elaborate and justify the penalty imposed on individuals - the personal penalty imposed on Shri Anuj Agarwal is set aside. Penalties imposed on the assessees/appellants are confirmed. Appeal allowed - decided against appellant-assessee.
|