Wood classification under Heading 44.03 prevails where rough square logs retain bark and lack further processing.

Imported Ghana teak rough square logs retaining bark on at least one side were held to fall under Heading 44.03 as wood in the rough or roughly squared, because the evidence did not show the goods had been sawn, chipped lengthwise, sliced or peeled so as to meet Heading 44.07. On that classification, the contrary view sustaining Heading 44.07 was unsustainable, and the assessee succeeded. The valuation findings were only consequential to the classification dispute and did not survive independently once Heading 44.03 was restored; the contrary appellate order was therefore set aside with consequential relief.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the imported Ghana teak rough square logs were classifiable under Heading 44.03 or Heading 44.07; (ii) Whether the valuation findings based on the classification could stand.

Issue (i): Whether the imported Ghana teak rough square logs were classifiable under Heading 44.03 or Heading 44.07.

Analysis: The goods were described as rough square logs and the record showed that they were only roughly squared, with bark still present on at least one side. The evidence did not show that they had been sawn, chipped lengthwise, sliced or peeled in the manner required for Heading 44.07. Since the goods required further processing before use, they answered the description of wood in the rough, or roughly squared, under Heading 44.03.

Conclusion: The classification under Heading 44.07 was unsustainable and the goods were correctly classifiable under Heading 44.03, in favour of the assessee.

Issue (ii): Whether the valuation findings based on the classification could stand.

Analysis: The valuation determination was consequential to the classification dispute. Once the classification under Heading 44.03 was restored, the valuation findings recorded on that basis did not survive separately.

Conclusion: The valuation findings were affirmed consequentially, and the contrary appellate order was set aside, in favour of the assessee.

Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded, the lower appellate order was set aside, and the adjudicating authority's classification of the goods under Heading 44.03 was restored with consequential relief.

Ratio Decidendi: Timber that is only roughly squared and still retains bark, and which has not been further processed into sawn, sliced, chipped or peeled wood, is classifiable as wood in the rough rather than under the heading for sawn or otherwise further worked wood.

---