Antiseptic product classification turns on essential character, with antimicrobial use prevailing over incidental moisturising ingredients.

Antimicrobial handwash and body-wash products containing chlorhexidine, triclosan and povidone-iodine were treated as antiseptic or disinfectant preparations, not skin care preparations under Heading 33.04. Their essential character was determined by the active ingredients and intended antimicrobial use, while emollients and moisturisers were only ancillary and did not change the principal function. Packaging, labelling and directions for use did not point to cosmetic use, and the conditions in Notes 2 and 5 to Chapter 33 were not satisfied. The classification under Heading 33.04 was therefore rejected.

---

---

Issues: Whether the products were classifiable as skin care preparations under Heading 33.04 of the Central Excise Tariff, or whether their essential character as antimicrobial antiseptic products excluded such classification.

Analysis: The products were marketed and used for antimicrobial handwashing, body washing and, in one case, surgical handwashing. Their active ingredients were chlorhexidine, triclosan and povidone-iodine, all of which were shown to possess recognised antiseptic or disinfectant properties. The presence of emollient and moisturiser did not alter the principal function of the goods, since those ingredients served only to reduce irritation from frequent use. The packaging, labelling and directions for use did not indicate cosmetic use, and the requirements of Notes 2 and 5 to Chapter 33 were not satisfied.

Conclusion: The products were not classifiable under Heading 33.04 and the classification adopted by the authorities below was unsustainable; the appeal succeeded.

---