Ayurvedic medicine classification upheld where cosmetic references did not override the product's dominant medicinal character.

A product prepared in accordance with ayurvedic formulae remained classifiable as an Ayurvedic medicine under Tariff Heading 3003.30 because the added synthetic green colour had no therapeutic value and did not alter its essential character. The label, read as a whole, described the product as a medicine for several ailments, while references to cosmetic effects on hair were insufficient to displace its dominant medicinal character. Chapter Notes 1(d) of Chapter 30 and 2 of Chapter 33 did not exclude it from the Ayurvedic medicine entry, so classification under Tariff Heading 33.05 / Tariff Item 14F(2) was rejected.

---

---

Issues: Whether the product was classifiable as an Ayurvedic medicine under Tariff Heading 3003.30 or as a preparation for use on the hair under Tariff Heading 33.05 / Tariff Item 14F(2).

Analysis: The product was found to be prepared in accordance with ayurvedic formulae and the addition of synthetic organic green colour did not alter its essential character because that colour had no therapeutic value. The label, read as a whole, described the product as a medicine for several ailments and did not hold it out as an ordinary cosmetic or as a preparation for use on the hair. The reference to cosmetic effects such as making the hair soft or black was treated as insufficient to displace the dominant medicinal character. On that basis, the classification principles under Chapter Notes 1(d) of Chapter 30 and 2 of Chapter 33 did not take the product out of the Ayurvedic medicine entry.

Conclusion: The product was classifiable as an Ayurvedic medicine under Tariff Heading 3003.30 and not under Tariff Heading 33.05 / Tariff Item 14F(2); the Revenue's appeal failed.

---