Nogi and Co. Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise - Court Judgment

Excerpt:

.....by the chemical examiner is as under: "it is a preparation for care of hair-pleasant smelling hair oil containing added ingredients. the manufacturer had declared in the test memo, that the ingredients used as 'brahmi leaves and mehandi leaves, nagarmotha, amla, kapoorkachri, coconut oil, dhaniya and preservative." 68. classification was being approved from time to time. however, w.e.f. 17-3-1985, it was proposed to classify the product as perfume under t.i. 14f(ii). the t.i. 14f(ii) reads as under : "(ii) preparations for the care of the hair, such as : brilliantines, perfumed hair oils, hair lotions, pomades and creams, hair dyes, shampoos whether or not containing soap or organic surface active agents." the appellants claim that theirs is not "perfumed hair oil" and that the smell of the hair oil is the smell of medicinal herbs and is not agreeable or even tolerable. they submit that it is not that all hair oils are covered under t.i. 14f(ii) but only perfumed hair oil and since that product is not a perfumed hair oil, it goes out of the purview of the tariff heading approved by the department and falls under residuary entry i.e. t.i. 68.2. we have gone through the.....

Judgment:

1. The classification of "Chandrika Brahmi Hair Oil" manufactured by the appellants arises for determination in the present appeal - according to the appellants, the product is classifiable under T.I. 68 while the department's contention is that it is classifiable under T.I.14F(ii) of the Schedule to the erstwhile Central Excise Tariff. The appellants have asked for a decision on merits and hence we have perused the records and heard the ld. DR and render our findings as below : The composition of the product as described by the Chemical Examiner is as under: "It is a preparation for care of hair-pleasant smelling hair oil containing added ingredients. The manufacturer had declared in the test memo, that the ingredients used as 'Brahmi Leaves and Mehandi Leaves, Nagarmotha, Amla, Kapoorkachri, coconut oil, Dhaniya and preservative." 68. Classification was being approved from time to time. However, w.e.f. 17-3-1985, it was proposed to classify the product as perfume under T.I. 14F(ii). The T.I. 14F(ii) reads as under : "(ii) Preparations for the care of the hair, such as : brilliantines, perfumed hair oils, hair lotions, pomades and creams, hair dyes, shampoos whether or not containing soap or organic surface active agents." The appellants claim that theirs is not "perfumed hair oil" and that the smell of the hair oil is the smell of medicinal herbs and is not agreeable or even tolerable. They submit that it is not that all hair oils are covered under T.I. 14F(ii) but only perfumed hair oil and since that product is not a perfumed hair oil, it goes out of the purview of the Tariff Heading approved by the Department and falls under residuary entry i.e. T.I. 68.

2. We have gone through the order of the authorities below. We find that the A.C. has clearly set out that one of the ingredients of the product namely, kapoorkachri is an aromatic root - stalks which is also used as perfume. The Chemical Examiner's report also bears out the case of the department that hair oil in question is a perfumed product, hence applying the ratio of the order of the Tribunal reported in 1992 (62) E.L.T. 584 (Tribunal) in the case of Veto Co. v. C.C.E., Madras classifying 'Rita' as a perfumed hair oil under T.I. 14(ii)(b) (a product similar to the product in dispute in appeal before us), we hold that 'Chandrika Brahmi Hair Oil' is classifiable under T.I. 14F(ii), confirm the impugned order of classification and reject the appeal.