https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=409130 For classification between Chapters 30 and 33, the Revenue had to first prove that the goods were cosmetics or toilet preparations within Chapter 33; its evidence from packaging, advertisements and a hospital opinion was insufficient, so the burden was not discharged. The 28.02.2005 tariff amendment removed the need for labels or literature to expressly indicate cosmetic use, but it did not dispense with the basic requirement that the goods fall within Chapter 33. As the products were manufactured under an ayurvedic drug licence, drew ingredients from authoritative ayurvedic texts, and were used therapeutically and prophylactically for skin and hair disorders, they were classifiable as ayurvedic medicaments under Chapter 30; rule 3(c) had no application. en-us Fri, 25 Jun 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 30 Jun 2021 08:22:10 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=409130 For classification between Chapters 30 and 33, the Revenue had to first prove that the goods were cosmetics or toilet preparations within Chapter 33; its evidence from packaging, advertisements and a hospital opinion was insufficient, so the burden was not discharged. The 28.02.2005 tariff amendment removed the need for labels or literature to expressly indicate cosmetic use, but it did not dispense with the basic requirement that the goods fall within Chapter 33. As the products were manufactured under an ayurvedic drug licence, drew ingredients from authoritative ayurvedic texts, and were used therapeutically and prophylactically for skin and hair disorders, they were classifiable as ayurvedic medicaments under Chapter 30; rule 3(c) had no application. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 25 Jun 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=409130