9911796707
TMI Blog2002 (2) TMI 244X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... question for consideration in this appeal is the classification, with effect from 1-4-94, of storage tanks, reservoir, vats and similar containers of a capacity not exceeding 300 litres. The appellant in the classification list that it filed effective from that date showed these goods under part III of the classification list claiming that these goods were not dutiable. The department was of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed "Builders' ware of plastic, not elsewhere specified or included." Sub-heading 10 was for "Reservoirs, tanks, vats and similar containers, of a capacity exceeding 300 litres." The representative of the appellant contends that as a result of the amendment of clause (a) of reservoirs, tanks, vats and similar containers, of a capacity of 300 litres or less would no longer be classifiable under 39.2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ds are stated not to have been manufactured out of polyurethane foam, they would not be classifiable under sub-heading 90 of this heading. 4. The reliance placed by the representative of the appellant on the decision of the Tribunal in Fusion Polymers Ltd. v. CCE [1999 (111) E.L.T. 644] is misplaced. It is not very clear what the goods under consideration were in that case. All that the Tri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cover tanks required by builders and building contractors such as for storage of water overhead and other tanks, the Tribunal concluded that such tanks would not be classifiable under 39.25. The Supreme Court was unable to confirm this view. It noted that once it is established that the description of the goods was akin to the description under 39.25 there is no difficulty in holding that the tank ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
