Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Commissioner of Central Excise Versus M/s. Adore Multi Products

2017 (5) TMI 235 - CESTAT BANGALORE

Classification of goods - revitalizing hair nutrient - antidandruff hair vitaliser - whether the goods manufactured and cleared by the appellant are to be classified as perfumed hair oils under 3305.10 or as other preparations for use in the hair under 3305.99? - Held that: - the product which undoubtedly is made for use on hair also contains several ayurvedic ingredients which are said to have properties to promote hair growth, etc. The product has been added with perfume only to get rid of unp .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ir. However, it is neither a perfumed hair oil nor hair fixture and therefore it appropriately gets covered in the category of other under sub-heading 3305.99 of the Schedule - the product classified under 3305.99 of the CETA as prevailed at the relevant time - appeal allowed - decided in favor of Revenue. - E/738/2003-DB - Final Order No. 20608 / 2017 - Dated:- 3-5-2017 - Shri S. S. Garg, Judicial Member And Shri V. Padmanabhan, Technical Member Mr. Mohd. Yousaf, AR For the Appellant None For t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

uthorities that these products claimed to be for prevention of hair loss, promotion of hair growth and in the case of antidandruff hair vitalizer, to prevent dandruff. The original authority finalized the classification of these products under No.3305.99 of the CETA which was leviable at the relevant time @ 16% duty plus 16% Special Excise Duty of the value determined under Section 4A. The claim of the respondent was that these products were classifiable under 3305.10 leviable to duty at 16% as .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ground, we heard Shri Mohd. Yousaf, learned AR and none appeared for the respondent. 3. The learned AR explained the grounds of Revenue appeal as under: (i) It is seen from the product labels of both the disputed products that they contain various ingredients which are in the nature of ayurvedic proprietary medicines. These labels also clearly show that the impugned goods are not sold as perfumed hair oils but as hair vitaliser or anti dandruff hair vitaliser. From the details, it is evident tha .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

. CCE, Vadodara: 1999 (111) ELT 625 (Tribunal) 4. The dispute in the present case essentially is whether the goods manufactured and cleared by the appellant are to be classified as perfumed hair oils under 3305.10 or as other preparations for use in the hair under 3305.99. Revenue s contentions in the present appeal is mainly that the impugned goods are not perfumed hair oils but contain several ayurvedic ingredients such as Tea-Tree Oil, neem oil, which act as antidandruff agent and also other .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

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


|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

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

Go to Mobile Version