Transferable duty credit scrips validity and bona fide transferee entitlement to exemption upheld where scrips were subsisting at import, appeals allo...
Classification of knocked down motor vehicle component imports: Notification benefit denied because items are standalone non kit parts requiring subst...
Reassessment against a deceased assessee: procedural defect mandates fresh reassessment; nonresponsive petitioner may be treated as legal representati...
The dominant issue was whether an imported implantable intracranial "stent" was classifiable as an "artificial part of the body" under CTI 9021 39 00 or under the residual implanted appliances entry CTI 9021 90 90. Applying the scope of Heading 9021 and the anatomical replacement test, the authority held that the device functions therapeutically as a scaffold to retain embolization coils and achieve occlusion, without replicating or substituting any anatomical vessel or aneurysm wall segment. Since it is not a prosthetic substitute and the competing entries must be compared at the same hierarchical level, classification under "artificial parts" was rejected and the product was classified under CTI 9021 90 90. - AAR
The dominant issue was whether an imported implantable intracranial "stent" was classifiable as an "artificial part of the body" under CTI 9021 39 00 or under the residual implanted appliances entry CTI 9021 90 90. Applying the scope of Heading 9021 and the anatomical replacement test, the authority held that the device functions therapeutically as a scaffold to retain embolization coils and achieve occlusion, without replicating or substituting any anatomical vessel or aneurysm wall segment. Since it is not a prosthetic substitute and the competing entries must be compared at the same hierarchical level, classification under "artificial parts" was rejected and the product was classified under CTI 9021 90 90. - AAR
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.