https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42456 Imported container handling cranes were held classifiable under Heading 84.22, because the tariff entry for lifting and handling machinery covered a special-purpose crane whose primary function was container handling, while Heading 87.07 applied to mechanically propelled works trucks and similar vehicles used for short-distance transport. The ordinary meaning of the tariff language controlled, and Brussels Explanatory Notes were treated as persuasive only where the Indian tariff text was ambiguous. On refund, duty paid under a mistaken classification was recoverable as money collected without authority of law, with limitation running from discovery of the mistake. The refund claim was held within time under Article 113 of the Limitation Act and Section 72 of the Contract Act. en-us Sun, 19 Mar 1989 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 11 Jun 2010 13:09:34 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42456 Imported container handling cranes were held classifiable under Heading 84.22, because the tariff entry for lifting and handling machinery covered a special-purpose crane whose primary function was container handling, while Heading 87.07 applied to mechanically propelled works trucks and similar vehicles used for short-distance transport. The ordinary meaning of the tariff language controlled, and Brussels Explanatory Notes were treated as persuasive only where the Indian tariff text was ambiguous. On refund, duty paid under a mistaken classification was recoverable as money collected without authority of law, with limitation running from discovery of the mistake. The refund claim was held within time under Article 113 of the Limitation Act and Section 72 of the Contract Act. Case-Laws Customs Sun, 19 Mar 1989 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42456