Ayurvedic medicament classification turns on common parlance and textual ingredients, keeping the products in Chapter 3004.

Ayurvedic products are to be classified by applying the common parlance test together with the test of whether their ingredients are found in authoritative Ayurvedic texts. On the stated facts, sharbat containing Gulab Ark, sugar and water, taken in measured dosage and supported by Ayurvedic references, and tail with ingredients traced to Ayurvedic texts and a disclaimer that it was an Ayurvedic medicine, both satisfied these tests. Approval from competent drug authorities further supported medicament classification. The products were therefore treated as Ayurvedic medicaments under Chapter heading 3004 and not as goods of Chapter 21 or Chapter 33, with the result that denial of the area based exemption was unsustainable.

---

---

Issues: Whether the disputed products, namely sharbat and tail, were classifiable as Ayurvedic medicaments under Chapter heading 3004 or under Chapter 21 and Chapter 33 for the purpose of denial of area based exemption under Notification No. 49/2003-CE dated 10/06/2003.

Analysis: The classification had to be decided on the basis of the twin test applied to Ayurvedic products, namely whether the goods are understood in common parlance as medicaments and whether their ingredients are found in authoritative Ayurvedic texts. The record showed that the sharbat contained ingredients such as Gulab Ark, sugar and water, was recommended to be taken in measured dosage, and was supported by Ayurvedic textual references. The tail contained several ingredients found in authoritative Ayurvedic texts and carried a disclaimer that it was an Ayurvedic medicine and not a cosmetic or toiletry preparation. Both products also had approvals from the competent drug authorities. On these facts, the products answered the test of Ayurvedic medicaments and the Revenue had no basis to treat them as goods of Chapter 21 or Chapter 33.

Conclusion: The sharbat and tail were correctly classified under Chapter heading 3004 as Ayurvedic medicaments and were not liable to be excluded from the benefit of Notification No. 49/2003-CE.

Final Conclusion: The Revenue's challenge to the classification failed and the denial of exemption was unsustainable.

Ratio Decidendi: A product claiming to be an Ayurvedic medicament is to be classified by applying the common parlance test together with the test of ingredients being found in authoritative Ayurvedic texts, and where both tests are satisfied the product remains a medicament notwithstanding incidental therapeutic, cosmetic, or consumable attributes.

---