https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96044 Pocket-size electronic diaries that recorded numbers and addresses and performed calculating functions were classified under Heading 84.70, not Heading 84.71, because they did not fit the tariff description of automatic data processing machines or the other goods covered by Heading 84.71. The customs tariff itself governed assessment of duty, and a classification adopted in an import policy publication did not bind customs authorities. The claimed benefit of doubt was rejected because the tariff position was clear, and the duty demand was upheld. en-us Fri, 17 Nov 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 16 Dec 2011 17:49:06 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96044 Pocket-size electronic diaries that recorded numbers and addresses and performed calculating functions were classified under Heading 84.70, not Heading 84.71, because they did not fit the tariff description of automatic data processing machines or the other goods covered by Heading 84.71. The customs tariff itself governed assessment of duty, and a classification adopted in an import policy publication did not bind customs authorities. The claimed benefit of doubt was rejected because the tariff position was clear, and the duty demand was upheld. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 17 Nov 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96044