Tariff classification of bath products cannot rest on freshness claims, and new classification grounds cannot be raised for the first time on appeal.

A bathing product used for washing the skin was analysed for tariff classification, with the note concluding that mere claims of freshness did not make it a beauty or skin-care preparation under Heading 33.04, and that the product did not fit that description. It also records that a new tariff classification plea under Heading 33.07 could not be introduced for the first time at the appellate stage because it was not part of the case before the Commissioner. The discussion states that the impugned classification order was set aside and consequential relief followed, illustrating the principle that classification depends on the product's actual description and use, and that fresh grounds cannot be raised in appeal.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the product "Liril Active Shower Gel" was classifiable under Heading 33.04 of the tariff rather than Heading 3401.10; (ii) whether the Department could seek classification under Heading 33.07 for the first time in appeal.

Issue (i): Whether the product "Liril Active Shower Gel" was classifiable under Heading 33.04 of the tariff rather than Heading 3401.10.

Analysis: Heading 33.04 covers beauty or make up preparations and preparations for the care of the skin, while Heading 3401.10 covers soap in any form. The product was undisputedly used for washing the skin and for bathing, and its advertised claim of freshness did not make it a preparation for the care of the skin within Heading 33.04. The asserted use claimed by the manufacturer was not a valid criterion for classification, and the product did not answer the description of Heading 33.04.

Conclusion: The classification under Heading 33.04 was not sustainable, and the assessee's classification could not be rejected on that basis.

Issue (ii): Whether the Department could seek classification under Heading 33.07 for the first time in appeal.

Analysis: A new classification plea that was not part of the case before the Commissioner could not be entertained for the first time at the appellate stage. The Tribunal therefore declined to consider the alternative Heading 33.07 plea.

Conclusion: The alternative classification under Heading 33.07 was not permitted to be raised in appeal.

Final Conclusion: The impugned classification order was set aside and the appeals succeeded, with consequential relief to the assessee.

Ratio Decidendi: A product used for bathing cannot be classified as a skin-care preparation merely because it claims to impart freshness, and a new tariff classification plea cannot be raised for the first time in appeal.

---