Medicament classification of hair vitaliser upheld despite general-store sales, as medicinal use and formulation outweighed cosmetic presentation.

Krithika Hair Vitaliser was treated as a medicament rather than a cosmetic hair preparation because its ingredients, Siddha formulation, drug licence, label, literature, commercial presentation and claimed medicinal use for hair ailments showed therapeutic character. Sale through general stores or supermarkets did not change the classification, as there is no requirement that a medicament be sold only through medical shops or on prescription. Applying the prior classification approach, the product was upheld under Heading 3003.39 and not Heading 3305.10, and the Revenue's challenge was rejected.

---

---

Issues: Whether Krithika Hair Vitaliser was classifiable as a medicament under Heading 3003.39 or as a cosmetic hair preparation under Heading 3305.10, and whether the Revenue's appeal against the appellate classification order was sustainable.

Analysis: The product was examined in the light of its ingredients, Siddha formulation, drug licence in Form 25E, label and literature, commercial presentation, price, and common parlance understanding. The fact that the product was sold in general stores or supermarkets was held to be immaterial, as there is no statutory requirement that a medicament must be sold only through medical shops or on prescription. The product's herbal content, claimed medicinal purpose for hair ailments, and the licence issued for manufacture of drugs supported the view that it was not a mere cosmetic. Applying the classification approach adopted in earlier decisions, the product was treated as a medicament and not as a perfumed or cosmetic hair oil. Consequently, the appellate authority's view classifying the product under Heading 3003.39 was upheld.

Conclusion: Krithika Hair Vitaliser was held to be a medicament classifiable under Heading 3003.39, not a cosmetic under Heading 3305.10, and the Revenue's appeals were rejected.

---