Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Cce Vs. Ozone Ayurvedic

Cce vs Ozone Ayurvedic

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi Decided Sep 20, 2004
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/36547

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Judge
Decided On
Subject
Land Acquisition

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Land Acquisition

Key legal issue
Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Cce

Respondent

Ozone Ayurvedic

Legal References

Reported In
(2004)(117)LC456Tri(Delhi)

Excerpt

1. in these 2 appeals filed by revenue the issue involved is whether wanish skin cream manufactured by m/s. ozone ayurvedics is classifiable under sub-heading 3003.39 of the schedule to the central excise tariff act as confirmed by the commissioner (appeals) under the impugned order or is classifiable under chapter 33 of the tariff as cosmetics.2. we heard shri o.p. arora, learned sdr for the revenue, and shri j.bansal, learned advocate for the respondents. both the learned sdr and the learned advocate mentioned that the issue stands decided by the tribunal in the case of the respondents themselves vide final order nos. 534-536/2003-nb(b) dated 23.7.2003 as . in the said decision, the tribunal has held that the product in question is manufactured out of the ingredient mentioned in text books an is used for treatment of pregnancy stretches and the revenue has failed to produce any evidence that this product is known in the trade market as cosmetics. the tribunal, further, relying upon the decision of delhi high court in the case of manish pharma plasto pvt. ltd. v. union of india , has rejected the appeal filed by the revenue and has upheld of the impugned order under chapter 30 of the central excise tariff. in view of this the present appeal is also rejected as it also relates to the classification of the same product which has already been held to be medicament by the tribunal.

Full Judgment

1. In these 2 appeals filed by Revenue the issue involved is whether wanish skin cream manufactured by M/s. Ozone Ayurvedics is classifiable under Sub-heading 3003.39 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act as confirmed by the Commissioner (Appeals) under the impugned Order or is classifiable under Chapter 33 of the Tariff as cosmetics.

2. We heard Shri O.P. Arora, learned SDR for the Revenue, and Shri J.Bansal, learned Advocate for the Respondents. Both the learned SDR and the learned Advocate mentioned that the issue stands decided by the Tribunal in the case of the Respondents themselves vide Final Order Nos. 534-536/2003-NB(B) dated 23.7.2003 as . In the said decision, the Tribunal has held that the product in question is manufactured out of the ingredient mentioned in text books an is used for treatment of pregnancy stretches and the Revenue has failed to produce any evidence that this product is known in the trade market as cosmetics. The Tribunal, further, relying upon the decision of Delhi High Court in the case of Manish Pharma Plasto Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India , has rejected the appeal filed by the Revenue and has upheld of the impugned Order under Chapter 30 of the Central Excise Tariff. In view of this the present appeal is also rejected as it also relates to the classification of the same product which has already been held to be medicament by the Tribunal.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial