SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

S.L.PEERAN, V.K.ASHTANA
Commissioner of Central Excise, Chennai – Appellant
Versus
Pond’s (India) Ltd. – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Aruna Gupta,C. Chidambaram

ORDER

Per V.K. Ashtana :

In these 14 appeals by Revenue, the simple issue for consideration is whether product "White Petroleum Jelly" manufactured, put into containers namely plastic tubes and plastic containers are to be classified under Chapter 27 as Petroleum Jelly or under Chapter 33 as Cosmetics.

2. Heard Ms. Aruna Gupta, Ld. DR who submits that while there is no doubt that the material contained in these containers is merely White Petroleum Jelly I.P., however other legends printed thereon remove it from the purview of Chapter 27 and make to fall within the purview of Chapter 33. In the case of products packed in plastic containers other than tubes, the legend also includes the trade name "Vaseline" and thereafter the words "an effective dressing for burns, cuts, scrapes etc." and further words "pure and safe". In the packing of the materials in tubes also, apart from the trade name "Vaseline", the legend printed as "Lip Guard" and "relieves dry lips". Ld. DR submits that in the case of jelly packed in the said tubes, the same is sold as a Lip Guard for relieving the dryness of lips when they are applied. Thus, the use is that of protecting and softening the skin of the lips.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top