Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Home Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles News Highlights
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Gopaldas Visram & Co. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise Mumbai-IV

2016 (11) TMI 1274 - CESTAT MUMBAI

Classification of goods - Cetraben Cream - whether classified as medicament or as cosmetics? - Held that: - the said product would merit classification under chapter 30 by recording that the ingredients used in the manufacturing of the product are mentioned in different pharmacopoeia and letters of medical practitioners based in India and abroad indicate the product in question is a medicament - appeal allowed. - APPEAL NO: E/524/2005 - ORDER NO: A/90579/16/EB. - Dated:- 29-8-2016 - Shri M V Rav .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

also discharge appropriate duty liability. The dispute in the present case is regarding a P&P medicament Cetraben Cream which appellant claimed as medicament while Revenue is the view that the product merits classification as cosmetics. The adjudicating authority has classified the product as cosmetics and confirmed the demand raised with interest and imposed penalties. 3. Learned Counsel would take us through the entire case records and submit that the impugned order is incorrect as the cl .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ug Control of India by a letter dated 31/07/1995 has categorically issued no objection certificate for marketing of the product as it is not considered to be a new drug . He brings to our attention the said letter annexed at page number 197 of the appeal memoranda. He relies upon the following Supreme Court s judgment for the proposition that such products are classified as medicament. i. BPL Pharmaceuticals v. Collector 1995 (75) ELT 485 (SC); ii. Seagull Drugs (Ayurvedic) v. Commissioner of Ce .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

tral Excise v. Sarvotham Care Ltd. 2015 (322) ELT 575 (SC) ix. Commissioner of Central Excise v. Dermocare Laboratories (G) Pvt. Ltd. 2010 (259) ELT 405 (Tri.-Ahd.) 4. Learned Departmental Representative on the other hand would draw our attention to the tariff entry under chapter 30 and 33. He would submit that the product in question is not medicament just because it has got some healing properties. It is his submission that the product needs to be classified by the usage it is put to by the co .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Forum
what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version