Just a moment...

Top
FeedbackReport
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Feedback/Report an Error
Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By: ?
Even if Sort by Date is selected, exact match will be shown on the top.
RelevanceDate
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        Note

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        <h1>Court classifies products as medicaments or cosmetics under Chapters 30 and 33</h1> <h3>PUMA AYURVEDIC HERBAL (P) LTD. Versus COMMISSIONER OF C. EX., NAGPUR</h3> PUMA AYURVEDIC HERBAL (P) LTD. Versus COMMISSIONER OF C. EX., NAGPUR - 2006 (196) E.L.T. 3 (SC), [2006] 145 STC 200 (SC), 2006 AIR 1561, 2006 (3) SCC 266 Issues Involved:1. Classification of products as medicaments or cosmetics under the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985.2. Application of the twin test for determining product classification.3. Evaluation of evidence and burden of proof regarding product classification.4. Relevance of authoritative opinions and previous judgments in classification disputes.Detailed Analysis:1. Classification of Products:The core issue was whether the products manufactured by the appellant should be classified as medicaments under Chapter 30 or as cosmetics under Chapter 33 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The classification impacts the rate of excise duty, with medicaments attracting nil duty and cosmetics attracting a higher duty.2. Application of the Twin Test:The judgment emphasized the twin test for classification:- Common Parlance Test: Whether the product is commonly understood as a medicament. If a product is used specifically for treating ailments and not for regular use, it is considered a medicament.- Ayurvedic Ingredients Test: Whether the ingredients are mentioned in authoritative Ayurvedic texts.The court noted that both tests are recognized by the Central Board of Excise and Customs and should be applied to determine the classification.3. Evaluation of Evidence and Burden of Proof:The appellant provided substantial evidence, including Ayurvedic texts, certificates from doctors, and opinions from Ayurvedic practitioners, to support the classification of their products as medicaments. The Collector (Appeals) relied on an opinion from the Directorate of Ayurveda, Maharashtra, which confirmed that the ingredients used in the products were described in Ayurvedic texts and were meant for treating skin diseases. The court highlighted that the burden of proving the correct classification lies with the revenue, which failed to provide any evidence to rebut the appellant's claims.4. Relevance of Authoritative Opinions and Previous Judgments:The court referenced several previous judgments where products with Ayurvedic ingredients were classified as medicaments. For instance:- C.C.E. v. Sharma Chemical Works: The burden of proof lies with the revenue to show that a product is not a medicament.- C.C.E. v. Pandit D. P. Sharma: Emphasized the common parlance test for classification.- Naturalle Health Product (P) Ltd. v. C.C.E.: Followed the twin test for classification.- Amrutanjan v. C.C.E.: Held that products with medicinal ingredients, even in small quantities, should be classified as medicaments.- BPL Pharmaceuticals v. C.C.E.: Classified a medicated shampoo as a medicament based on its therapeutic use.- Muller & Phipps (India) Ltd. v. C.C.E.: Classified Johnson Prickly Heat Powder as a medicament.- Dabur (India) Ltd. v. C.C.E.: Classified products with Ayurvedic ingredients as medicaments.Conclusion:The court concluded that most of the appellant's products should be classified as medicaments under Chapter 30, except for Puma Herbal Massage Oil, Puma Herbal Massage Oil for Women, and Puma Scalp Tonic Powder, which were classified as cosmetics under Chapter 33. The appeals were allowed for the products classified as medicaments, and the matter was remanded to the Assistant Collector for quantification of duty for the products classified as cosmetics. The appeals in Civil Appeals No. 1414-1416/2004 were dismissed.Products Classified as Medicaments:- Puma Neem Facial Pack (Neemal)- Puma Anti-Pimple Herbal Powder (Pimplex)- Puma Herbal Facial Pack (Herbaucare)- Puma Herbal remedy for Facial Blemishes- Puma Hair Tonic Powder (Sukeshi)- Puma Anti-Dandruff Oil (Dandika)- Puma Shishu Rakshan Tel- Puma Neem TulsiProducts Classified as Cosmetics:- Puma Herbal Massage Oil- Puma Herbal Massage Oil for Women- Puma Scalp Tonic Powder (Scalpton)

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found