Specific tariff classification prevails over residuary entry where the machine's functional capability supports the specific heading.

Classification of an imported fabric printing machine turned on whether it was covered by the specific tariff entry for the machine or by a residuary heading. Functional capability and actual use showed that the machine could produce repetitive textile designs by heat transfer, and the exhaustion of a transfer sheet after use did not defeat that capability. Because a specific entry prevailed over the residuary entry, the machine was classified under Heading 84.40(1) and exclusion from Heading 84.59(1) followed, with reclassification and consequential relief in favour of the importers.

---

---

Issues: Whether the imported fabric printing machine was classifiable under Heading 84.40(1) as a specific entry for the machine, or under Heading 84.59(1) as a residuary entry.

Analysis: The machine was found to be capable of producing repetitive textile designs by heat transfer, and the fact that one transfer sheet is exhausted after use did not negate its ability to give repetitive printing when fed with sufficient transfer paper. The record also showed actual repetitive printing on fabric. On that basis, the entry specifically covering the machine was preferred and the residuary heading could not be applied.

Conclusion: Heading 84.40(1) applied to the machine and classification under Heading 84.59(1) was ; the reclassification claim succeeded and consequential relief followed in favour of the appellants.

Ratio Decidendi: Where goods are covered by a specific tariff entry, classification under a residuary entry is impermissible, and functional capability as proved by use will govern the specific classification.

---