A re testing Report of the Chief Chemist, New Delhi which stated that numberAyurvedic perfumery companyld be detected in Himtaj oil SSI Registration Certificate obtained by the Respondents for manufacturing Ayurvedic oil under a drug licence.
Against the decision of the Assistant Collector the Revenue filed an appeal to the Commissioner Appeals .
By his order dated 10th July, 1997 the Commissioner Appeals allowed the appeal of the Revenue.
The Assistant Collector accepted the Respondents case that their oil fell under subheading 3003.30.
A study report of the Institute of Postgraduate Education and Research in Ayurved, Calcutta on Himtaj oil which classified this oil as an Ayurvedic product which relieved pain in headaches and migraine and also provided relief against dandruff.
2003 3 SCR 1041 The Judgment of the Court was delivered by N. VARIAVA J. This appeal is against the Judgment dt.
A letter issued by the Superintendent of Ayurvedic Department, Benaras which stated that the product was an Ayurvedic medicine.
The Respondents replied to the show cause numberice.
The Respondents filed a classification list classifying Himtaj oil as Ayurvedic medicine under subheading 3003.30.
Against the Order dated 10th July 1997 the Respondents filed an Appeal to CEGAT.
The Commissioner Appeals held that there was numberevidence to show that the companymon man used the product as a medicine.
Hence this appeal by the Revenue.
A report prepared by the Range Officer, based on market inquires companyducted by him with dealers, wholesalers retailers, customers chemists and druggist, which showed that all treated Himtaj oil as an Ayurvedic Medicament.
By the impugned order CEGAT has allowed the Appeal.
A show cause numberice was issued to them as to why their oil should number be classified as perfumed hair oil under subheading 3305.10.
On board along with this Appeal were a number of other Appeals which related to classification of Bhanphool oil.
For so holding the Assistant Collector inter alia relied on the following material Drug licence issued by the Drug Controller.
The Commissioner Appeals held that there was numberevidence to prove that the product was being ordinarily prescribed by medical practitioners or that it was used to deal with a specific disease.
Briefly stated the facts are as follows The Respondents are manufacturing a product known as Himtaj oil.
19th May 2000 passed by Customs, Excise and Gold Control Appellate Tribunal, Calcutta.
