Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether resin-covered fabric, coated on both sides with synthetic resin, was excluded from Heading 59.03 by Chapter Note 2(a)(3) of Chapter 59 and therefore classifiable outside that heading so as to qualify for the exemption notification.
Analysis: Chapter Note 2(a)(3) excludes textile fabrics completely embedded in plastics or entirely coated or covered on both sides with such material, provided the coating or covering can be seen with the naked eye. The decisive condition is the existence of coating or covering on both sides, not that the original fabric must disappear from view. The test report recorded that the sample was a woven fabric coated or impregnated on both sides with phenolic synthetic resin. The lower appellate authority proceeded on an erroneous reading of the chapter note by importing a condition not found in it.
Conclusion: The product was not classifiable under Heading 59.03 on the basis adopted below, and the assessee was entitled to the consequential exemption benefit.
Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded and the classification adopted against the assessee was set aside with consequential relief.
Ratio Decidendi: A tariff exclusion must be applied according to its express terms, and a condition not contained in the relevant chapter note cannot be read into it to deny classification or exemption.