2018 (6) TMI 376 - AT - Central Excise

Classification of goods - Sentim Toothpaste - case of Revenue is that the product Sentim Sensitive Fluoride Toothpaste, according to the department, is classifiable under chapter 33 of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 and the same is not eligible to be classified as medicament under Chapter 30 of Central Excise Tariff Act - Held that - The product manufactured by the appellant is sold in the name of Sentim Sensitive Fluoride toothpaste . The products are manufactured from the ingredients i.e. drug namely Potassium Nitrate B.P., Sodium Fluoride dentrifice base and Sodium Benzoate. The product is not ordinarily sold as tooth paste like colgate, peposodent, etc. but it is sold with a declaration on the product that it is used for treatment of tooth decay and cavity prevention for the sensitive teeth. Therefore, for the product in question, cannot be said that it is an ordinary tooth paste classifiable under chapter 33. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.

Summary

Issues: Classification of product under Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985

Detailed Analysis:
1. Background: The appeal challenges the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeal- IV) upholding the classification of the product "Sentim Toothpaste" under Chapter 33 instead of Chapter 30 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985.

2. Appellant's Argument: The appellant argues that the toothpaste is meant for prevention of decay of sensitive teeth and cavity protection, thus qualifying as a medicament under Chapter 30. They highlight the need for a drug license, the higher price compared to regular toothpaste, and the composition of Potassium Nitrate B.P. and Sodium Fluoride as evidence of its medicinal nature.

3. Revenue's Argument: The revenue contends that the product, marketed as "Sentim Sensitive Fluoride toothpaste," is specifically designed for treatment of tooth decay and cavity prevention for sensitive teeth. They reference a previous tribunal order involving a similar product to support their classification under Heading 3003.

4. Tribunal's Decision: The Tribunal, after considering both arguments, finds that the product in question is distinct from regular toothpaste and qualifies as a medicament under Chapter 30. They rely on the precedent set by the previous tribunal order involving a similar product, emphasizing the higher price, restricted use, and sales through chemist shops as indicators of its medicinal nature. Consequently, the impugned order is set aside, and the appeal is allowed.

This detailed analysis showcases the legal arguments presented by both parties, the relevant legal provisions under the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, and the Tribunal's rationale for overturning the classification of the product as per the previous tribunal order.