Tribunal Upholds Tooth Powder Classification

The Tribunal upheld the classification of Dant Manjan Lal under sub-heading 3306.10 as tooth powder/toothpaste based on Supreme Court decisions and a Larger Bench's classification. The Tribunal emphasized that the Supreme Court's decision binds the Revenue for the future, dismissing the argument that a change in the Tariff could alter the classification. Additionally, the Tribunal highlighted that subsequent circulars supersede earlier ones and that a product is either ayurvedic medicine or not, regardless of the Tariff version. The appeal was rejected, with the Tribunal emphasizing the classification under the Central Excise Tariff Act.

---

---

Issues:
Classification of Dant Manjan Lal - Ayurvedic medicine or tooth powder/toothpaste under Central Excise Tariff Act, demand of duty confirmation.

Analysis:
The appeal questioned the classification of Dant Manjan Lal by M/s. Shree Baidyanath Ayurved Bhavan Pvt. Ltd. under Heading 30.03 as ayurvedic medicine or under sub-heading 3306.10 as tooth powder/toothpaste, along with the confirmation of duty demand against them. The advocate cited a Tribunal decision and Supreme Court rulings emphasizing the classification as tooth powder. However, the Revenue argued that Supreme Court judgments in the appellant's case and the Board's circulars supported the classification as tooth powder, post-dating the Tribunal decision. The Tribunal upheld the classification under sub-heading 3306.10 based on the Supreme Court's decision in the appellant's case and the Larger Bench's classification. The Tribunal highlighted that the Supreme Court's decision binds the Revenue for the future, emphasizing the law of the land. The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, rejecting the argument that a change in the Tariff could alter the classification.

The Tribunal further noted that subsequent circulars superseded earlier ones, emphasizing that a product is either ayurvedic medicine or not, regardless of the Tariff version. The Tribunal referred to a Supreme Court ruling regarding the statutory force of circulars issued under specific provisions, highlighting that not all clarificatory notes or press releases hold the same weight. Consequently, the Tribunal rejected the appeal, emphasizing that the press release cited did not have statutory force and did not support the appellant's contentions. Ultimately, the Tribunal found no merit in the appeal and rejected it based on the classification upheld under the Central Excise Tariff Act.

---