9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Classification of item "R 75 Rotamasta Long Run Paper Plates" under Customs Tariff - Dispute between Chapter Heading 4810 and sub heading 48.16 - Applicability of interpretative rules for classification. Analysis: The appeal challenged the classification of "R 75 Rotamasta Long Run Paper Plates" under the Customs Tariff. The Assessee claimed classification under Chapter Heading 4810, covering paper and paperboard coated with inorganic substances. However, the Revenue disagreed and argued for classification under sub heading 48.16, specifically for offset plates. The Revenue relied on the Explanatory Notes under Chapter Heading 48.16, emphasizing the description of "offset plates of paper." The Commissioner (Appeals) noted that the item was indeed an "offset paper plate" with a description in the Bill of Entry as "Lithographic coated plate." The Commissioner held that the specific description under Heading 48.16 for "paper plates" took precedence over the general classification under Chapter Heading 4810. The Commissioner emphasized that the item's ultimate use as an offset plate was crucial, regardless of the coating with kaolin or being short or long run. The Appellant argued that the Customs House traditionally classified such items under Heading 48.10 as "paper and paper board." However, the Revenue contended that the Explanatory Note under Heading 48.16 explicitly included "paper for offset plates," supporting the classification under sub heading 48.16 based on specific descriptions and interpretative rules. Upon careful consideration, the Tribunal found no error in the impugned order. The item's descriptions in various Bill of Entries confirmed its nature as lithographic offset paper plates designed for Rotaprint Offset Printing Machines. The Tribunal agreed with the Revenue that the item's specific use and characteristics warranted classification under sub heading 48.16, as per interpretative Rules 3(a) and 3(c). The Explanatory Note under Heading 48.16 further supported this classification, considering the item's specialized use in printing machines. Consequently, the Tribunal upheld the classification under Chapter Heading 48.16, dismissing the appeal due to the absence of any legal flaws in the order.
|
