https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47225 The Court upheld the Tribunal's decision to classify the product "LICEL" under tariff sub-heading 3003.10 instead of 3808.10. Despite being perceived as an insecticide, the product's therapeutic and prophylactic purposes qualified it as a "Medicament" under Chapter 30, excluding it from Chapter 38. The Court emphasized the importance of adhering to specific definitions and criteria in tariff headings for accurate classification, considering a product's intended use over common perception. Previous judgments and legislative intent supported the Court's ruling, dismissing the Civil Appeal. en-us Thu, 10 Feb 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 09 Apr 2020 09:51:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47225 The Court upheld the Tribunal's decision to classify the product "LICEL" under tariff sub-heading 3003.10 instead of 3808.10. Despite being perceived as an insecticide, the product's therapeutic and prophylactic purposes qualified it as a "Medicament" under Chapter 30, excluding it from Chapter 38. The Court emphasized the importance of adhering to specific definitions and criteria in tariff headings for accurate classification, considering a product's intended use over common perception. Previous judgments and legislative intent supported the Court's ruling, dismissing the Civil Appeal. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 10 Feb 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47225