1995 (3) TMI 109 - SC - Central Excise

Summary

Issues involved: Determination of whether a product qualifies as an Ayurvedic Medicine for exemption from excise duty under a specific notification.

1. Background of the case: The appeals concern the classification of "Dant Manjan Lal" manufactured by the appellant-Company as either an Ayurvedic Medicine or a toilet preparation for excise duty exemption under Notification No. 62/78-C.E.

2. Ingredients and classification: The product contains 70% Geru (red earth) and is claimed by the appellant to have medicinal properties. However, the Tribunal found that Geru is primarily a filler or coloring agent, not commonly recognized as a medicine, leading to the rejection of the appellant's claim for exemption.

3. Legal interpretation and expert opinions: The appellant argued that various provisions, expert opinions, and consumer statements support the product's classification as a medicinal preparation. However, the Tribunal emphasized the popular understanding of the product over scientific or technical definitions, ultimately denying the exemption based on common usage perceptions.

4. Judgment and reasoning: The Supreme Court agreed with the Tribunal's approach, stating that a product is not considered medicinal unless prescribed by a Medical Practitioner for specific conditions, not for daily use like a toothpaste. The Court upheld the Tribunal's decision, dismissing the appeals and emphasizing the importance of popular perception in determining product classification.

5. Additional petitions: Two additional petitions were dismissed based on the same reasoning as the main appeals, and another appeal was withdrawn by the appellant following new instructions, resulting in its disposal for lack of prosecution.

This summary encapsulates the key issues, arguments, and the Supreme Court's decision regarding the classification of "Dant Manjan Lal" for excise duty exemption under the relevant notification.