TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Tribunal classifies imported machines under Customs Tariff Act despite dissent.</h1> The Tribunal classified the imported multi-function machines under Heading 8471.60 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975, based on the majority opinion. The ... Printer/Scanner - Multi-function digital printers Issues Involved:1. Classification of imported multi-function machines under the appropriate Customs Tariff Heading.Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:1. Classification of multi-function machines:Arguments by the Appellant:The appellant contended that the multi-function machines, which include printing, copying, faxing, and scanning capabilities, should be classified under Heading 8471.60 as output units of Automatic Data Processing Machines (ADPM). They argued that the principal function of these machines is printing, supported by the fact that 75% to 80% of the cost of the components is attributed to the print function. They relied on Note 5(D) to Chapter 84, which states that printers satisfying certain conditions must be classified under Heading 84.71. They also cited previous Tribunal decisions in Xerox Modicorpn. Ltd. and MX Software Services Ltd., where similar multi-function machines were classified under Heading 8471.60.Arguments by the Respondent:The respondent argued that the machines should be classified under Heading 8472.90 as office machines. They emphasized that the machines can function independently of external ADPMs, performing tasks like copying and scanning in stand-alone mode. They cited Chapter Note 5(B)(c) and argued that since these machines are primarily used for commercial purposes in offices and shops, they should fall under Heading 8472.90.Findings by the Tribunal:The Tribunal reviewed the arguments, catalogues, and literature of the machines. It was noted that the machines are multi-functional and can operate independently without being connected to ADPMs. The Tribunal acknowledged that both lower authorities had classified the machines under Heading 8472.90 due to their various standalone functions. However, the Tribunal also considered the appellant's reliance on previous decisions where similar machines were classified under Heading 8471.60.Separate Judgments:Majority Opinion (Member (Judicial) and Vice-President):The majority opinion held that the machines should be classified under Heading 8471.60. They emphasized that the principal function of the machines is printing, and they satisfy the conditions of Note 5(D) to Chapter 84. They supported their decision by referring to the previous Tribunal decisions in Xerox Modicorpn. Ltd. and MX Software Services Ltd., which classified similar machines under Heading 8471.60. They concluded that the machines are principally designed to function as printers connected to ADPMs and should be classified accordingly.Dissenting Opinion (Member (Technical)):The dissenting opinion argued that the machines should be classified under Heading 8472.90. The dissenting member emphasized that the machines have standalone capabilities and can operate independently of ADPMs. They argued that the machines are primarily used in commercial settings for tasks like copying and scanning, which aligns with the classification under Heading 8472.90.Final Order:In view of the majority decision, the appeal was allowed, and the machines were classified under Chapter Heading 8471.60 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975.Conclusion:The Tribunal's final decision, based on the majority opinion, classified the imported multi-function machines under Heading 8471.60, recognizing their principal function as printing and their connectivity to ADPMs.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
