https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=421226 In tariff classification disputes, the Revenue must prove that the goods fit the competing entry, and a declared classification cannot be displaced by conjecture or by reliance on a residual heading without affirmative evidence. Applying the structure of Heading 8901 and Heading 8903, the vessel was treated as one principally designed for transport of persons unless shown to be a yacht or other pleasure or sport vessel. Promotional literature and the absence of manufacturer invoices were insufficient to displace the declared description. The imported vessel was therefore not shown to fall under Heading 8903, and the classification under Heading 8901 was upheld. en-us Wed, 13 Apr 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 20 Apr 2022 08:31:30 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=421226 In tariff classification disputes, the Revenue must prove that the goods fit the competing entry, and a declared classification cannot be displaced by conjecture or by reliance on a residual heading without affirmative evidence. Applying the structure of Heading 8901 and Heading 8903, the vessel was treated as one principally designed for transport of persons unless shown to be a yacht or other pleasure or sport vessel. Promotional literature and the absence of manufacturer invoices were insufficient to displace the declared description. The imported vessel was therefore not shown to fall under Heading 8903, and the classification under Heading 8901 was upheld. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 13 Apr 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=421226