Cosmetic classification prevails for skin-care products lacking therapeutic character, and advance ruling can cover proposed future supplies.

Skin-care preparations were classified by reference to their declared composition, labels, intended use, and the tariff entries read with the interpretation rules and the statutory meaning of cosmetic. Preparations primarily meant for cleansing, beautifying, moisturizing, toning, protecting, or improving skin appearance were treated as cosmetics under Chapters 33 and 34, because the specific cosmetic description prevailed over a general claim to medicament classification. Products such as talcum powders, face powders, body lotions, skin preparations, and sunscreen preparations were therefore held outside Chapter 30. The authority also recognised that advance ruling can extend to supplies proposed to be undertaken, including products not yet manufactured.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellant's skin-care preparations were classifiable as medicaments under Chapter 30 or as cosmetics/soaps under Chapters 33 and 34; and whether the advance ruling could extend to products proposed to be manufactured but not yet in existence.

Analysis: The classification exercise was undertaken on the basis of the tariff entries, the rules of interpretation of the First Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975, and the statutory meaning of cosmetic under Section 3(aaa) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940. The products were examined by their declared composition, labels, and intended use. Preparations meant mainly for cleansing, beautifying, moisturizing, toning, protecting, or improving the appearance of skin were held to fall within cosmetic headings, especially where they lacked a primary therapeutic or prophylactic character. The specific description of talcum powders, face powders, body lotions, skin preparations, and sunscreen preparations was held to prevail over a general claim of medicament classification. The authority also noted that advance ruling is available for supplies proposed to be undertaken, and therefore could cover products not yet manufactured.

Conclusion: The products in issue were not classifiable under Chapter 30 as medicaments. They were held to be classifiable under Chapters 33 and 34, and the appeal succeeded only to the limited extent of including proposed products within the advance ruling framework.

Final Conclusion: The impugned ruling was modified by reclassifying the disputed products outside Chapter 30 and disposing of the appeal with limited relief.

Ratio Decidendi: A preparation is classifiable as a medicament only if its primary character is therapeutic or prophylactic; where its predominant use is cosmetic or skin-care related, the specific cosmetic tariff entry prevails over a general medicament claim.

---