Tariff classification of monofilament as residuary item, not filament yarn, based on common parlance meaning of yarn.

Monofilament manufactured from polymer chips was held not to fall within the tariff description of man-made filament yarn. In the absence of a statutory definition of "yarn", its meaning was taken from dictionary sense and common parlance, which pointed to use in weaving or spinning; monofilament was not synonymous with filament yarn. A Board circular could assist administration but was not binding on quasi-judicial authorities. The product was therefore classifiable under the residuary tariff item, and the assessee succeeded.

---

---

Issues: Whether monofilament manufactured from polymer chips was classifiable as man-made filament yarn under Item 18II(i)(a) of the old tariff, or as a residuary item.

Analysis: The word "yarn" was not defined in the Act or the Rules, so its meaning had to be gathered from dictionary sense and common parlance. On that approach, yarn connotes use in weaving or spinning, and filament is not synonymous with filament yarn. The Board's circular defining yarn could assist administration, but it was not an authoritative interpretation of the tariff entry and was not binding on quasi-judicial authorities. The material on record and the cited decisions supported the view that monofilament, by itself, did not answer the description of filament yarn.

Conclusion: Monofilament was not classifiable under Item 18II(i)(a) as filament yarn and was more appropriately classifiable under the residuary tariff item; the assessee succeeded.

---