Crustaceans, molluscs and other aquatic invertebrates, prepared or preserved.

Crustaceans, molluscs and other aquatic invertebrates, prepared or preserved See subheading note 2 to this chapter.

Source: eu_cn_en (EUR-Lex 02019XC0329(02)-20250113)

Other This subheading covers shrimps and prawns packed in airtight containers (see the explanatory note to subheading 1602 50 31 ).

Source: eu_cn_en (EUR-Lex 02019XC0329(02)-20250113)

In airtight containers See the explanatory note to subheading 1602 50 31 .

Source: eu_cn_en (EUR-Lex 02019XC0329(02)-20250113)

[76]Explanatory note XIII to Rule 2(b) reads as follows:“As a consequence of this Rule, mixtures and combinations of materials or substances, and goods consisting of more than one material or substance, if prima facie classifiable under two or more headings, must therefore be classified according to the principles of Rule 3.”

Source: citt_decision (AP-2021-008)

[18]and theExplanatory Notesto the Harmonized Commodity Description and Coding System(Explanatory Notes),

Source: citt_decision (AP-2021-008)

[19]published by the WCO. While classification opinions and explanatory notes are not binding, the Tribunal will apply them unless there is a sound reason to do otherwise.

Source: citt_decision (AP-2021-008)

[24]The Tribunal must therefore firstdetermine whether the goods in issue can be classified at the heading level according to Rule 1 of theGeneral Rulesas per the terms of the headings and any relative section or chapter notes in theCustoms Tariff, having regard to any relevantclassification opinions and explanatory notes. It is only where Rule 1 does not conclusively determine the...

Source: citt_decision (AP-2021-008)

[36]With respect to the order of analysis, it is established that, where there is one exclusionary note that precludes theprima facieclassification of goods in both headings at issue, the Tribunal must begin its analysis with the heading referred to in that explanatory note.

Source: citt_decision (AP-2021-008)

[64]The Tribunal also finds that the analysis of the WCO classification opinion is confusing when it amended its analysis to state that the goods can be classified using only rules 1 and 6. By confirming that only Rule 1 is required for the classification, the HS Committee is stating that the goods in issue can be classified at the heading level according to the terms of the headings and any...

Source: citt_decision (AP-2021-008)

[69]While classification opinions and explanatory notes are not binding, the Federal Court of Appeal has stated that the Tribunal should apply them unless there is a sound reason to do otherwise.

Source: citt_decision (AP-2021-008)