https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45214 Applying the common parlance test and examining composition and use, the HC held that the product was not a daily-use talcum powder but a preparation used for the specific purpose of treating prickly heat, with use discontinued once the ailment subsides. The inclusion of an active medicinal ingredient (Chlorphenesin IP) altered the product's essential character, and expert opinion as well as the manufacturer's own prior classification supported treatment as a medicament rather than a cosmetic. Consequently, the product was held classifiable under Tariff Heading 30.03 (medicaments) and not under Heading 33.04 (cosmetics); the impugned CBEC circular/decision and the related show cause notice were quashed insofar as they applied to the petitioner's product. en-us Thu, 20 May 1999 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 19 Dec 2025 20:29:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45214 Applying the common parlance test and examining composition and use, the HC held that the product was not a daily-use talcum powder but a preparation used for the specific purpose of treating prickly heat, with use discontinued once the ailment subsides. The inclusion of an active medicinal ingredient (Chlorphenesin IP) altered the product's essential character, and expert opinion as well as the manufacturer's own prior classification supported treatment as a medicament rather than a cosmetic. Consequently, the product was held classifiable under Tariff Heading 30.03 (medicaments) and not under Heading 33.04 (cosmetics); the impugned CBEC circular/decision and the related show cause notice were quashed insofar as they applied to the petitioner's product. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 20 May 1999 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45214