2004 (12) TMI 428 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues: Classification of Lakme Maximum Daily Face Wash 50 gms under Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985

The issue in this case revolves around the classification of the product 'Lakme Maximum Daily Face Wash 50 gms' under the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The department initially proposed to classify the product under Heading 3304 instead of the claimed Heading 3402.90, based on the grounds that it should be considered a cosmetic or toilet preparation for the care of the skin. The Chemist's test report described the product as a skin care preparation, further supporting the classification under Heading 3304. The Advocate for the appellants argued for classification under Heading 3402.90, emphasizing the presence of organic surface active material in the preparation. However, the absence of a test report verifying the technical parameters required for this classification weakened the appellant's argument. The HSN notes and exclusions under Heading 3402 were also analyzed, with a focus on whether the product could be considered a detergent. The appellant's reliance on a previous case was deemed misplaced, as the form and intended use of the product in question differed. The judgment ultimately upheld the classification under Heading 3304 as a cleansing cream, in line with Chapter Notes 2 and 4 to Chapter 33.

The Tribunal also addressed the appellant's plea for the benefit of Cum-duty price and the reworking of demands. The matter was remitted back to the original authority for a reevaluation of the demands, with the issue of limitation and validity of the demands left open for the appellants to raise in the re-adjudication process. The appeal was to be dismissed concerning classification, with the classification under Heading 33.04 upheld. However, the appeal on valuation and the validity and time-bar aspects of the duty demands were to be allowed for remand to the original authority for further adjudication after hearing the appellants. The appeal was ultimately disposed of in the above terms, providing clarity on the classification issue while allowing for further review on valuation and duty demands.