Common parlance and specific tariff entry control classification of tooth powder over a general Ayurvedic medicament description.

Classification of Dant Manjan Lal turned on the tariff heading terms, Chapter Notes and common parlance, because Chapter 30 contained no statutory definition of Ayurvedic medicine in sub-heading 3003.31. The product's composition, character and everyday use showed it was understood as a tooth powder for dental hygiene, and Chapter Note 1(d) to Chapter 30 excluded preparations falling under Chapter 33 even if therapeutic properties were claimed. Chapter Note 2 to Chapter 33 covered toilet preparations, so the specific tooth powder entry in Chapter 33 prevailed over the more general medicament description. The earlier classification ruling remained relevant because no material change in the product or its use was shown.

---

---

Issues: Whether Dant Manjan Lal was classifiable as an Ayurvedic medicament under Sub-heading 3003.31 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 or as a tooth powder under Chapter Heading 33.06, and whether the earlier classification ruling could be displaced after the tariff amendment.

Analysis: The relevant tariff scheme required classification according to the heading terms and the Chapter Notes. Chapter 30 did not contain a definition of Ayurvedic medicine in Sub-heading 3003.31; the sub-heading was only a description of goods and not a statutory definition. For classification of medicaments vis-a -vis cosmetics or toilet preparations, the common parlance test continued to be material, together with the nature, character and user perception of the product. The product remained the same in composition, character and everyday use, and was understood as a tooth powder used for dental hygiene. Chapter Note 1(d) of Chapter 30 excluded preparations of Chapter 33 even if they possessed therapeutic or prophylactic properties, while Chapter Note 2 of Chapter 33 covered preparations suitable for use as cosmetics or toilet preparations. The specific entry for tooth powder in Chapter 33 therefore prevailed over the more general medicament description. The earlier decision concerning the same product remained relevant because no material change in the product or its use had been shown.

Conclusion: The product was not classifiable as an Ayurvedic medicament under Sub-heading 3003.31 and was correctly classifiable as a tooth powder under Chapter Heading 33.06; the classification in favour of the Department was upheld.

Ratio Decidendi: In the absence of a statutory definition, classification of a product as medicament or toilet preparation continues to depend on common parlance and the product's nature, character and use, and a specific tariff entry for the product prevails over a general medicament entry.

---