Fork-lift truck classification under customs tariff upheld where documents and manuals matched the equipment's actual functions.

Imported container handling equipment was classified as a fork-lift truck rather than as lifting and handling equipment under Heading 84.22 because the shipping documents, quotation, and operating manuals consistently described it as a fork-lift truck or container lift truck. The manuals showed that it performed the ordinary functions of a frontlift, including loading, unloading over short distances, and carrying loads on forks or attachments. On those facts, the equipment answered the tariff description of a fork-lift truck, not a crane, and the earlier ruling cited by the importer was found inapplicable. The revenue's classification was upheld and the appeal failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the imported container handling equipment was correctly classified as a fork-lift truck under the customs tariff, rather than under Heading 84.22 as lifting and handling equipment.

Analysis: The imported documents, bill of lading, quotation, and user and operating manuals all described the goods as a fork-lift truck or container lift truck. The manuals showed that the equipment performed the usual functions of a frontlift, including loading and unloading over short distances and carrying the load on forks or attachments. On that basis, the goods were found to answer the description of a fork-lift truck and not a crane, and the earlier ruling relied upon by the importer was held inapplicable on facts. The lower authorities had therefore correctly applied the tariff classification principles and the interpretative rules.

Conclusion: The classification adopted by the revenue was upheld and the appeal failed.

---