9911796707
|
Home
Issues: Classification of imported product under Customs Tariff - Heading 1302.19 vs. Heading 30.03 vs. Heading 1302.39
In this case, the respondent imported a consignment of glucomannan, claiming classification under Heading 1302.19 of the Customs Tariff for vegetable extracts. The Custom House, however, viewed the product as a herbal medicine for reducing blood glucose levels and proposed classification under Heading 30.03. The Assistant Commissioner confirmed this classification. The Commissioner (Appeals) accepted the argument that the product was a single vegetable extract, not a medicament with multiple constituents, and classified it under Heading 1302.19, setting aside the Assistant Commissioner's order. The department appealed this decision, seeking classification under Heading 30.03. A new ground was added seeking classification under Heading 1302.39, which was not raised earlier. The Tribunal considered the definitions of mucilage and the product's properties, noting that swelling in cold water is not unique to mucilage. The Tribunal found the reasons for classifying the product as mucilage insufficient, especially considering the clinical uses cited. The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals) decision, dismissing the appeal. This judgment revolves around the classification of an imported product under different headings of the Customs Tariff. The primary issue is whether the product should be classified under Heading 1302.19 as a vegetable extract, Heading 30.03 as a medicament, or Heading 1302.39 as mucilage. The Custom House initially classified the product under Heading 30.03 based on its perceived therapeutic properties as a herbal medicine. However, the Commissioner (Appeals) disagreed, considering the product a single vegetable extract and classified it under Heading 1302.19. The department appealed, introducing a new ground for classification under Heading 1302.39, which was not previously raised, leading to a fresh issue for consideration. The Tribunal analyzed the definitions of mucilage and the product's properties to determine the appropriate classification. It noted that the mere fact that the product swells in cold water, a characteristic of mucilage, is not sufficient for classification as such. The Tribunal highlighted that many substances swell in cold water, and the distinction between mucilages and gums is not always clear. Despite the appeal citing ten clinical uses of the product, the Tribunal agreed with the Commissioner (Appeals) that the product, being unmixed and not intended for retail sales, does not fit under Heading 30.03 for medicaments. Therefore, the proposed classification under Heading 1302.39 as mucilage was also rejected. Ultimately, the Tribunal upheld the decision of the Commissioner (Appeals), dismissing the appeal and maintaining the classification under Heading 1302.19 for the imported product as a vegetable extract. In conclusion, the judgment clarifies the classification of the imported product under the Customs Tariff, emphasizing the importance of considering the specific characteristics and intended use of the product for accurate classification. The Tribunal's detailed analysis of the definitions and properties of mucilage, along with the product's features, led to the rejection of the proposed classifications under Heading 30.03 and Heading 1302.39. The decision highlights the significance of proper classification under the Customs Tariff based on the nature and composition of the imported goods, ensuring consistency and accuracy in trade regulations.
|
