Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

4.3 From the structure of Chapter 89, it is quite evident that navigability is not a criteria for determination of the Classification under the said chapter. Navigability would be one of the features for all the goods classifiable under chapter 89. In Chapter 89, vessels performing specific functions are classified on the basis of the function performed although they may have navigability, self propulsions and cargo carrying facility i.e. fish vessel (8902), Tugs (CTH 8904), dredger, a salvage ship, house boat (CTH 8905), Warship, pilot boat, hospital ship (CTH 8906) are classified in separate headings and they obtain their essential character from the general structural design of the vessel and the equipments fitted onto the vessel to perform a specialized task. However the classification of the vessels cannot be determined on the basis of that criteria. Classification of any vessel is based on its essential character ascertained on the basis of the functional features, structural design and the equipment fitted on board the vessel. It is the basic design keeping in view the function that is intended to be performed which determine the classification of the 23 C/89765,90086/2014 particular vessel. In this regard reliance is placed on the following judgments:

31 C/89765,90086/2014 a. vessel has limited navigational capability and in the insurance papers (Hull Policy), it is clearly stated "P&I risks limited to vessel plying within 12 nautical miles from prominent points to Goa Port". b. RFP for construction of vessel clarifies that it is required to ply up till 22 nautical miles for transferring iron ore from barges to mother vessel. c. The vessel was transported from China to India not under its own steam but on board another vessel. All the above factors show that navigability was not even the basic design essential for this vessel. 4.11 The tribunal has in case of Ocean Diving Centre Ltd Vs Commissioner of Customs Mumbai [2007 (2110 ELT 611 (T-MUM)] held as follows: