Customs classification of declared wool waste upheld where the department failed to prove the goods were serviceable yarn.

Imported goods declared as wool waste were held not to be displaced from that classification on the basis of mere visual inspection. Where the department contests the declared description in the invoice and Bill of Entry, the burden rests on it to prove the goods are different from what is declared. Superficial enquiries, unsupported market reports, and unused expert opinions were insufficient, and the hank form of the goods did not by itself establish serviceable yarn or require the importer to prove intended garnetting. The declared treatment as wool waste therefore stood.

---

---

Issues: Whether the imported goods, described in the invoice and Bill of Entry as wool waste, were liable to be classified as serviceable yarn for customs duty purposes.

Analysis: The declared description of the goods in the invoice and Bill of Entry was wool waste, and where the department disputes that description, the burden lies on the department to prove that the goods are different from what is declared. Mere visual inspection was insufficient to displace the importer's classification claim. The departmental enquiries were found to be superficial, and the later statement that the alleged market enquiries and expert opinions would not be relied upon left the charge unsupported. The fact that the goods were in hank form did not by itself establish that they were serviceable yarn, nor was the importer required to prove intended use by garnetting.

Conclusion: The department failed to substantiate its challenge to the declared classification, and the goods could not be denied the claimed treatment as wool waste.

---