9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Classification of goods as "puzzles" or "toys representing animals or non-human creatures." 2. Consideration of additional ground for classification under the residuary heading. Issue 1: The primary issue in this case was the classification of the goods in question as either "puzzles" or "toys representing animals or non-human creatures." The Appellant challenged the Order-in-Original, arguing that the items described as "transformers" were erroneously classified under EXIM Code 950349.03 as "other toys representing animals or non-human creatures" of plastic. The Commissioner relied on various definitions of "puzzle" to conclude that the items were toys and not puzzles. The items, resembling animals but transforming into robots through manipulation, were deemed toys representing animals or creatures and classified as such under entry 950349.03. The Appellant contended that the items required skill for manipulation, akin to puzzles, but the Commissioner's decision was upheld by the Tribunal. The Tribunal found that the items did not pose a puzzling question requiring ingenuity or patient effort to solve, thus confirming the classification as toys and not puzzles. Issue 2: The second issue arose when the Appellant sought to raise an additional ground for classification under the residuary heading, arguing that the items did not fit under the ordinary toy classification and should be considered under the residuary heading in sub-heading 9503.90. The Appellant relied on a clarification from the Directorate General of Foreign Trade (D.G.F.T) and previous judgments to support this argument. The Tribunal considered the additional ground raised by the Appellant and noted the existence of a residuary heading for "others" under sub-heading 95.03. Citing the D.G.F.T clarification and relevant case law, the Tribunal remanded the matter to the Commissioner for re-consideration based on the additional ground raised by the Appellant, granting an opportunity for a fresh hearing to determine the re-classification of the items under the residuary heading. In conclusion, the Tribunal upheld the classification of the goods as toys representing animals or non-human creatures and remanded the case for re-consideration regarding the classification under the residuary heading based on the additional ground raised by the Appellant.
|
