1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule β now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available


2. New: βIn Favour Ofβ filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws β
Just a moment...
1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule β now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available


2. New: βIn Favour Ofβ filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws β
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
<h1>Product 'Licel' Classified as Medicament under Central Excise Tariff Act</h1> The Tribunal upheld the classification of the product 'Licel' as a medicament under sub-heading 3003.10 of the Central Excise Tariff Act. The decision was ... Classification Issues involved: Classification of the product 'Licel' as a medicament under sub-heading 3003.10 or as an insecticide under sub-heading 3808.10 of the Central Excise Tariff Act.Analysis:1. Classification Dispute: The appeal revolves around the classification of the product 'Licel' manufactured by M/s. Sujanil Chemo Industries. The Appellants claimed classification under Heading 3808.10 as an insecticide, while the Assistant Collector classified it under Heading 3003.10 as a medicament due to its therapeutic value in treating pediculosis, an infestation of lice. The Collector (Appeals) upheld this classification, referring to a previous Tribunal decision. The key argument was whether the product's primary purpose was as a medicament or an insecticide.2. Appellant's Argument: The Appellant's representative argued that 'Licel' is a non-alcoholic natural herbal oil-based lice killer, emphasizing that the essential ingredient, Malathion, is an insecticide. They contended that lice infestation is not a disease but a nuisance caused by small wingless parasites, mainly head lice, which do not transmit diseases. The Appellant highlighted that 'Licel' is registered under the Insecticides Act, containing substances notified under the Act, and cited various references supporting the insecticidal properties of its ingredients.3. Respondent's Counter: The Respondent argued that both 'Mediker,' a similar product, and 'Licel' aim to eliminate lice, making them medicaments. They pointed out that 'Licel' contains multiple ingredients besides Malathion, supporting its classification as a medicament for treating lice infestation.4. Judgment and Analysis: The Tribunal analyzed various references, including medical dictionaries and research papers, to establish that lice infestation constitutes a disease known as pediculosis. They cited evidence from authoritative sources like the Merck Manual and the Physicians Desk Reference, confirming the disease's existence and treatment. The Tribunal concluded that a product intended to treat lice infestation, such as 'Licel,' qualifies as a medicament under the Central Excise Tariff Act. They referenced a previous case involving 'Mediker,' where the use of insecticides in drugs was acknowledged, further supporting the classification of 'Licel' as a medicament. Ultimately, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal, aligning with the decision in the Pharmasia case and upholding the classification of 'Licel' as a medicament under sub-heading 3003.10, rejecting the Appellant's claim for classification under sub-heading 3808.10.This detailed analysis highlights the core arguments, references, and the Tribunal's reasoning leading to the classification of the product 'Licel' as a medicament under the Central Excise Tariff Act.