Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether antimony oxide imported by the appellants was classifiable under Entry 28 as chemicals not otherwise specified or under Entry 30 as paints, colours and painter's material.
Analysis: The classification had to be read with the Import Control Policy, which recognised two grades of antimony oxide, namely painter grade and non-painter grade. The invoice for the imported goods showed them to be of non-painter grade. On that basis, the goods answered the description of Entry 28 rather than Entry 30.
Conclusion: Antimony oxide imported by the appellants was classifiable under Entry 28 and not under Entry 30, and duty was payable accordingly in favour of the appellants.
Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded and the classification adopted by the customs authorities was set aside.
Ratio Decidendi: Where a tariff entry classification depends on the commercial grade of the imported goods, the goods must be classified according to the grade shown by the invoice and the governing import policy.