Tariff classification of vitamin syrups turns on trade perception and marketing, not therapeutic value alone.

For tariff classification of Prolita Syrup, the decisive test was whether the product was understood and marketed in trade as a medicinal preparation or as a food supplement. The evidence showed it was marketed as a food supplement, the drug authorities had not treated it as a drug, and municipal licensing supported food-item treatment; trade notice and HSN notes also indicated that vitamin syrups may fall within food supplements. Mere therapeutic value, dosage directions, brand presentation, colour scheme, or prescription-oriented sale was insufficient to convert it into a patent or proprietary medicine. The product therefore remained classifiable as a food supplement, and the Revenue failed to displace the lower authority's view.

---

---

Issues: Whether Prolita Syrup was classifiable as a patent or proprietary medicine under Tariff Item 14-E or as a food supplement under Tariff Item 1-B.

Analysis: Classification depended on the nature of the product as understood in trade and commerce, the evidence of marketing, and whether the Revenue discharged the burden of proving that the product was a medicinal preparation. The product was shown to be marketed as a food supplement, the drug authorities had not treated it as a drug, municipal licensing supported its treatment as a food item, and trade notice and HSN notes indicated that vitamin syrups may be regarded as food supplements. The mere presence of therapeutic value, dosage directions, brand name, colour scheme, or prescription-oriented sale was held insufficient by itself to convert the product into a patent or proprietary medicine.

Conclusion: The product was not classifiable as a patent or proprietary medicine under Tariff Item 14-E and remained classifiable as a food supplement under Tariff Item 1-B.

Final Conclusion: The Revenue failed to dislodge the lower authority's classification, and the appeal was rejected.

Ratio Decidendi: For tariff classification of a product as a patent or proprietary medicine, the Revenue must prove by cogent evidence that the product is understood and marketed as a drug; therapeutic content or dosage instructions alone do not suffice where the product is commercially treated as a food supplement.

---