Commercial identity controls paper classification; grammage alone is insufficient, and excess duty becomes refundable on reclassification.

Tariff classification of white offset printing paper depended on its true commercial and technical identity, not on grammage alone. On the evidence, offset printing paper was a distinct variety used for offset lithography and was not to be treated as cartridge paper under the higher tariff entry. The reclassification in favour of the assessee therefore stood, and the duty collected in excess on the wrong classification was held refundable as consequential relief.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether white offset printing paper was correctly classifiable under Tariff Item 17(2) or under Tariff Item 17(3). (ii) Whether the assessee was entitled to refund of the differential duty paid pursuant to the reclassification.

Issue (i): Whether white offset printing paper was correctly classifiable under Tariff Item 17(2) or under Tariff Item 17(3).

Analysis: The classification could not be determined by grammage alone. The authorities relied chiefly on the higher weight of the paper, but the evidence showed that offset printing paper and cartridge paper, though similar in some respects, are not the same. The paper was supplied for printing purposes and the accepted technical descriptions showed that offset paper is a distinct variety used for offset lithography. Classification had to be made on the true character and commercial identity of the paper, not on substance alone.

Conclusion: The paper was not correctly classifiable under Tariff Item 17(2); it fell under Tariff Item 17(3), in favour of the assessee.

Issue (ii): Whether the assessee was entitled to refund of the differential duty paid pursuant to the reclassification.

Analysis: Once the higher assessment was found to be wrong, the duty collected on that basis could not be retained. The record did not show a bar to refund on the facts accepted by the Tribunal, and the amount collected in excess became refundable to the assessee.

Conclusion: The assessee was entitled to refund of the excess duty.

Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded and the assessee obtained relief on the classification dispute together with consequential refund of the excess duty.

Ratio Decidendi: In tariff classification of paper, commercial and technical identity governs, and grammage by itself is not a ative test for distinguishing one variety of paper from another.

---