Niyam v2 is live — start for just ₹100 — 200 credits to try

august 2015

Supreme Court of India · 2015-08-25

C.C.E., CHENNAI vs HINDUSTAN LEVER LTD.

Citation / case number
SC 2006/1945
Court
Supreme Court of India
Petitioner
C.C.E., CHENNAI
Respondent
HINDUSTAN LEVER LTD.
Author
A.K. SIKRI
Bench
ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN A.K. SIKRI

Judgment text excerpt

The Supreme Court addressed the classification of Vaseline Intensive Care Heel Guard (VHG) under the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, determining whether it should be classified as a skin care preparation under Chapter Heading 3304.00 or as a medicament under Chapter Heading 3003.10. The Court held that VHG is a skin care preparation, thus classifiable under Chapter 3304.00, as it does not possess curing properties that would qualify it as a medicament. Consequently, the excise duty applicable is 40% under the cosmetic preparations category.

C.C.E., CHENNAI vs HINDUSTAN LEVER LTD. · Niyam