Automatic data processing machine classification prevails for interactive flat panels; monitor classification and Rule 3(c) rejected.

Imported interactive flat panel display systems were treated as automatic data processing machines because they contained a CPU, RAM, storage, operating software, an OPS slot and connectivity ports, and could store, execute and process programmes on a standalone basis. Under Chapter Note 5(A) to Chapter 84, these features satisfied classification under Customs Tariff Item 8471 41 90. The display size and screen capability were regarded as product features rather than the principal function, so classification as monitors under Customs Tariff Item 8528 52 00 was rejected. Rule 3(c) of the General Rules for Interpretation was unnecessary because Rule 1 and the Chapter Notes were sufficient to resolve the tariff classification.

---

---

Issues: Whether the imported interactive flat panel display systems were classifiable under Customs Tariff Item 8471 41 90 as automatic data processing machines or under Customs Tariff Item 8528 52 00 as monitors, and whether recourse could be taken to Rule 3(c) of the General Rules for the Interpretation of the Import Tariff.

Analysis: The goods had an in-built CPU, RAM, storage, operating software, an OPS slot, and connectivity ports, and were capable of storing and executing programmes, accepting inputs, performing computations, and functioning on a standalone basis. On the test in Chapter Note 5(A) to Chapter 84, they satisfied the essential characteristics of an automatic data processing machine. The large screen size and display capability were treated as features of the product and not as its principal function. The heading for monitors under 8528 was found inapplicable because the goods were not mere display units and could not be classified by trade parlance or by resort to Rule 3(c) when the Chapter Notes and heading text themselves yielded a clear result. Rule 3(c) was held to be unavailable where Rule 1 and the Chapter Notes were sufficient to determine classification.

Conclusion: The goods were held classifiable under Customs Tariff Item 8471 41 90 and not under Customs Tariff Item 8528 52 00.

Final Conclusion: The classification adopted by the department was set aside and the assessee succeeded on the tariff classification issue, with refund of the differential duty as a consequential relief.

Ratio Decidendi: Where imported goods satisfy the statutory characteristics of an automatic data processing machine under the relevant Chapter Note, classification must be determined under the specific heading for such machines and not by treating display capability as the principal function or by invoking Rule 3(c) where Rule 1 and the Chapter Notes are sufficient.

---