Tariff classification burden rests on Revenue when challenging declared goods description; residual entry cannot be applied without proof.

CESTAT Mumbai held that the Revenue could not displace the importer's declared tariff classification for stainless steel tube fittings without proving the applicability of the alternative residual entry by proper evidence. The lower authorities had rejected the declared heading without examining the tariff description against the goods and without support from visual inspection or import documents. In classification disputes, the burden rests on the Revenue to justify the competing classification when departing from the importer's claim, and a residual heading cannot be applied merely on rejection of the declared description. The reclassification was therefore not legally sustainable.

---

---

Issues: Whether the imported stainless steel tube fittings were correctly reclassified from the declared tariff item to the residual tariff entry, and whether the Revenue discharged the burden of proving the alternative classification.

Analysis: The lower authorities rejected the declared classification without examining the meaning of the relevant tariff description against the goods and without any evidentiary basis such as visual inspection or scrutiny of import documents. The alternative entry relied upon was a residual one, but displacement of the declared classification required an independently supportable competing entry. In classification disputes, the burden lies on the Revenue to prove the applicability of the alternative heading or sub-heading when it seeks to depart from the importer's claim. The absence of proper evidence and justification rendered the re-determination unsustainable.

Conclusion: The reclassification was not legally sustainable and the importer's claim succeeded.

Ratio Decidendi: When the Revenue seeks to displace a declared tariff classification, it must establish the applicability of the alternative classification by proper evidence, and a residual entry cannot be applied merely by rejecting the importer's description without such proof.

---