2004 (1) TMI 397

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ation is whether the product manufactured by the appellant-assessee namely Dimethicone is classifiable under Tariff Item No. 3003.20 (as claimed by the appellant) or under Tariff Item No. 3910.00 (as claimed by the Respondent-Revenue). The Assistant Collector held that the product was classifiable under Tariff Item No. 3910.00. The Collector (Appeals) allowed the appeal and held that the product was classifiable under Tariff Item No. 3003.20. The Tribunal by the impugned judgment has reversed the order of the Collector (Appeals) and has held that the product is classifiable under Tariff Item No. 3910.00. 2. For consideration of the question, it is necessary to note the Tariff Items. They read as follows :- "4.1.1 Heading No. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....heading No. 30.03)" 4.1.5 Heading No. 30.03 & sub-heading No. 3003.20   30.03 Medicaments (including veterinary medicaments).     3003.20 Medicaments (other than patent or proprietary) other than those which are exclusively used in Ayurvedic, Unani, Siddha, Homeopathic or Bio-chemic systems. Nil 4.1.6     Note 2(i) to Chapter 30   2. For the purposes of headings No. 30.03 : (i)       'Medicaments' means goods (other than foods or beverages such as dietetic, diabetic or fortified foods, tonic beverages) not falling within heading No. 30.02 or 30.04 which are either :- (a)        product....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Tariff Items may change but it cannot now be urged that this product is not "Silicone in primary form". Of course even though this product is a "Silicone in primary form" by virtue of Note 1 to Chapter 38, it would not be covered by Entry 39.10 if it is "Medicament". 5. The question therefore is whether it can be considered to be a Medicament. The Tribunal, without the aid of the Hico Products case (supra), came to the conclusion that the product is a Silicone in primary form. In doing so, it has recorded that "it is not denied that Dimethicone BPC is otherwise a Silicone in primary form". It was submitted that this observation was not correct. It was submitted that it was always disputed that the product was a "Silicone in primar....