2004 (6) TMI 133 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues involved:
Classification of the product 'Microshield-2' as a medicament under 3003.10 or under 3304.

Analysis:
1. Issue of Classification: The primary issue in this case revolved around the classification of the product 'Microshield-2'. The show cause notice proposed denying the classification as a medicament under 3003.10 and suggested classification under 3304 based on the main function of the product being skin care with antiseptic properties as subsidiary. The CCE (A) confirmed this classification by emphasizing that the products were primarily for skin care containing emollients and moisturizers, with antiseptic properties being secondary. The appellants relied on a drug license to support their case, but the Asstt. Commissioner concluded that the products were primarily for skin care based on the percentage of active ingredients, not qualifying as medicinal topical antiseptics. The conclusion was supported by the absence of technical or expert opinions on the antiseptic ingredient levels. The Tribunal had previously ruled in favor of the assessee in a similar case, emphasizing the use of the product as an antiseptic by a doctor for classification under 3003.10.

2. Legal Interpretation: The judgment highlighted the importance of the predominant use of emollients and moisturizers in determining the classification of the product. It was noted that the absence of technical opinions on the antiseptic ingredient levels and the acceptance of the product by drug control authorities without insisting on higher percentages supported the classification under 3003.10. The Tribunal's previous decision in a similar case further reinforced the classification based on the product's use as an antiseptic by a doctor. The judgment emphasized the need for clear evidence to establish the primary purpose of the product for classification under the appropriate category.

3. Conclusion: The Tribunal upheld the classification of the product 'Microshield-2' under 3003.10, considering the predominant use for skin care with antiseptic properties as subsidiary. The appeals were allowed based on the findings, and the classification was ordered accordingly. The judgment provided a detailed analysis of the classification issue, emphasizing the significance of the product's composition and primary function in determining the appropriate category under the Customs and Excise Tariff Act, 1985.