https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=95315 A skin-care moisturising product was held classifiable under Heading 3304 because its dominant function was beauty or skin care, not fragrance; Heading 3303 was treated as covering toilet waters whose basic purpose is to impart scent. The record also showed that the department had been supplied with classification lists, composition details and labels, so suppression of facts was not established and the extended limitation period was not justified. As a result, the duty demand, penalty, interest and confiscation failed on limitation and the absence of suppression, while the classification determination was sustained. en-us Fri, 08 Dec 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 10 Dec 2011 11:37:58 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=95315 A skin-care moisturising product was held classifiable under Heading 3304 because its dominant function was beauty or skin care, not fragrance; Heading 3303 was treated as covering toilet waters whose basic purpose is to impart scent. The record also showed that the department had been supplied with classification lists, composition details and labels, so suppression of facts was not established and the extended limitation period was not justified. As a result, the duty demand, penalty, interest and confiscation failed on limitation and the absence of suppression, while the classification determination was sustained. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 08 Dec 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=95315