Common parlance test for excise classification placed sugar-based lozenges in confectionery, not ayurvedic medicaments.

Classification of the goods depended on their common parlance character rather than their scientific composition. Sugar-based lozenges sold in general confectionery shops and consumed for taste, without evidence of prescribed curative use by ayurvedic practitioners, were treated as confectionery. Mere reference to ingredients in ayurvedic texts was insufficient to make them medicaments. Applying the common parlance test, the tariff description as sugar confectionery prevailed over the claimed medicinal character, and the products were classifiable under sub-heading 1704.90 rather than as ayurvedic medicaments under sub-heading 3003.30.

---

---

Issues: Whether the products "Huny Herb", "Churyum drops" and "Tazza" were classifiable as ayurvedic medicaments under sub-heading 3003.30 or as sugar confectionery under sub-heading 1704.90 of the Central Excise Tariff.

Analysis: The classification turned on the popular or common parlance meaning of the goods rather than their scientific composition. The products were found to be sugar-based lozenges with minor ingredients, were marketed and sold in general confectionery shops, were consumed by ordinary persons for taste rather than for treatment of any specific ailment, and were not shown to be prescribed for curative use by ayurvedic practitioners. Mere mention of some ingredients in ayurvedic texts was held insufficient to make the goods medicaments. Applying the common parlance test, the tariff description of the goods as confectionery prevailed over their claimed medicinal character.

Conclusion: The products were correctly classifiable under sub-heading 1704.90 of the Central Excise Tariff and not under sub-heading 3003.30 as ayurvedic medicaments.

---