https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=72626 Adhesive plaster B.P.C. was held not to fall within Tariff Item 60 for adhesive tapes because, in common parlance, it was understood as a surgical dressing rather than an adhesive tape. The product was also found not to possess medicinal or therapeutic properties, supporting classification under the residuary Tariff Item 68. Earlier administrative and Board materials consistent with that view were accepted, while an earlier Tribunal decision on a similar product was not treated as binding because it had proceeded on concession and had not decided the point in issue. Classification under the Central Excise Tariff must therefore follow the product's true commercial identity. en-us Thu, 27 Nov 1986 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 20 May 2011 18:04:35 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=72626 Adhesive plaster B.P.C. was held not to fall within Tariff Item 60 for adhesive tapes because, in common parlance, it was understood as a surgical dressing rather than an adhesive tape. The product was also found not to possess medicinal or therapeutic properties, supporting classification under the residuary Tariff Item 68. Earlier administrative and Board materials consistent with that view were accepted, while an earlier Tribunal decision on a similar product was not treated as binding because it had proceeded on concession and had not decided the point in issue. Classification under the Central Excise Tariff must therefore follow the product's true commercial identity. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 27 Nov 1986 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=72626