TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (4) TMI 892
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....to order classifying the goods under CTH 89039990 has taken into account the complete features of the boat as mentioned in the pamphlet, Manufacturer's Catalogue, Website on features of the boat imported, i.e. "Montery 180 FS", explanatory notes and various dictionary meanings of Excursion boat, and has rightly classified the goods as falling under CTH 89039990. The boats are found to be boats for pleasure or sport and not excursion boats as known in the common parlance, which are meant for transport of people. I have also come to the same conclusion after seeing all the relevant documents. The Tariff leaves no room for any doubt. Therefore I find no reasons to interfere with the order passed by the lower authority.' with which the claim....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....assification. On the other hand, it was proposed by the customs authorities that 'other' within sub-heading 8903 99, intended for 'yachts and other vessels for pleasure or sports; rowing boats and canoes' corresponding to heading 8903 of First Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 which, after excluding 'inflatables', 'canoes' 'sailboats' of all kinds and 'motorboats, other than outboard motorboats', is more appropriate. In doing so, 'this heading covers all vessels for the transport of persons or goods, other than vessels of heading 8903 ......', in Explanatory Notes of The Harmonised System of Nomenclature as relegating heading 8901 of First Schedule to Customs Tariff Act, 1975 to secondary acknowledgement vis-&....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of more appropriate description at the 'heading' level before going on to eliminate competing descriptions therein at the 'sub-heading' and 'tariff item' levels within. Before we advert to the design of the grouping that concerns the present dispute, it is necessary for us to dwell on the 'onus' aspect of classification that has been mandated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. 5. Assessment, the most basic objective of customs law, is the application of the prescribed rate of duty to the value of imported goods. Unlike valuation, based on a conceptual articulation attended by an exhaustive string of sequential options that may be leveraged to discard value declared by the importer before substitution by an appraised value without compromise t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....bject matter is to be treated as Sodium Chloride.' and in Hindustan Ferodo Ltd v. Collector of Central Excise, Bombay [1997 (89) ELT 16 (SC)] holding that '3. It is not in dispute before us, as it cannot be, that the onus of establishing that the said rings fell within Item 22F lay upon the Revenue. The Revenue led no evidence. The onus was not discharged. Assuming therefore, that the Tribunal was right in rejecting the evidence that was produced on behalf of the appellants, the appeal should, nonetheless, have been allowed. xxxx 7. Learned Counsel for the Revenue submitted that the matter be remanded to the Tribunal so that the evidence on record may be reappreciated. As we have stated, no evidence was led on behalf....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ricted by the enumeration of two specific descriptions corresponding to tariff items, viz., 'sail boats' and 'motor boats excluding outboard motor boats' within the secondary, and relevant, residual 'other' of the heading. This unusual grouping of overwhelmingly residual and the strictly limited enumeration that complements the description of the heading is in harmony with the Explanatory Note referred to only with the proposition that the specific enumerations at the tariff item level finds preferment over determination by elimination in the pyramidal scheme of heading 8901 of First Schedule to Customs Tariff Act, 1975. Conversely, the residual 'other' at the tariff item level of heading 8903 is intended for 'yachts' alone and none other. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ding to comparative evaluation as last resort. There is no finding that asserts the includability of the impugned goods within the residual 'other' in heading 8903 of First Schedule to Customs Tariff Act, 1975. 9. Furthermore, the contents - pictorial and verbal - of the promotional material appear to have had such undue influence as to gloss over its pertinence to 'Monterey 180 FSW' therein even as it purports to advert only to 'Monterey 180 FS' which may well be the 'sports' version of a glamourless transport vessel. The original authority appears to have indulged in conjecture which responsible discharge of authority to assess does not permit. We find it inexplicable that the lower authorities also adopted an adverse inference from th....