2001 (7) TMI 401

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nt (appeal C/1023/00), the Tribunal had held that the regrind polycarbonate would be correctly classified under Heading 3907.40 of the Customs Tariff, and accordingly, Heading 390740 00 of the Import Policy. It had noted that, by application of the provisions of Note 7 to the Chapter Heading 3915 which is for waste, parings and scrap of plastics would not apply to such waste, parings and scrap of a single thermoplastic material transformed into primary forms, further noting that this provision was based upon the Explanatory Notes to the Harmonised System of the World Customs Organisation. Since the goods in question were made entirely of polycarbonate which is a single thermoplastic material and were in one of the primary form specified in .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... that scrap of a single thermoplastic material transformed into a primary form recognised in the Chapter would not be classifiable under any of the headings from 01 to 11 of Chapter 39. This Note clearly is intended to provide guidelines for classification, in the first 11 headings of the Chapter of goods based on their origin or level of polymerisation. Thus, resins not highly polymerised, of the coumarone-indene type will be classifiable under Heading 39.11 and silicones under 39.10. Application of the principles contained in this note to waste, parings or scrap of a single thermoplastic material in a primary form will not have the effect of excluding such goods from classification under any of these eleven headings. It is worth emphasisi .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s or scrap would not be so classifiable if they are made out of a single thermoplastic material or one of the primary forms recognised in the note. (We have explained, in our earlier order the probable reasons for such an exception). There is thus no conflict between the provisions of Note 3 and Note 7 to the Chapter. Neither one of them overrides the other. The provisions of any one of them cannot be invoked to exclude the operation of the other. On the contrary, if the Commissioner s views are to be accepted, it would result in Note 7 being rendered meaningless - waste parings and scrap at all. The goods were, therefore, correctly classifiable under Heading 3907.40 of the Tariff and 390740 00 of the Policy. 7. It is also difficult for u .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X