Baby carriages and parts thereof.

[12]and the Explanatory Notes to the Harmonized Commodity Description and Coding System,

Source: citt_decision (AP-2009-049)

[13]published by the Customs Co-operation Council (also known as the World Customs Organization), as amended from time to time.” Accordingly, unlike chapter and section notes, theExplanatory Notesare not binding on the Tribunal in its classification of imported goods. However, the Federal Court of Appeal has stated that these notes should be respected, unless there is a sound reason to do...

Source: citt_decision (AP-2009-049)

(b) Mixtures, composite goods consisting of different materials or made up of different components, and goods put up in sets for retail sale, which cannot be classified by reference to Rule 3 (a), shall be classified as if they consisted of the material or component which gives them their essential character, insofar as this criterion is applicable. (c) When goods cannot be classified by...

Source: citt_decision (AP-2009-049)

27. The Tribunal agrees with the parties that Rule 3 of theGeneral Rulesapplies for purposes of classifying the goods in issue at the heading level. It is clear that, in the present case, the goods in issue are,prima facie, classifiable in two headings, namely, heading No. 87.15, if considered strollers, and heading No. 94.01, if considered infant car seats. 28. Rule 3 (a) of theGeneral...

Source: citt_decision (AP-2009-049)

33. According to Note (VIII) of theExplanatory Notesto Rule 3 of theGeneral Rules, “[t]he factor which determines essential character will vary as between different kinds of goods. It may, for example, be determined by the nature of the material or component, its bulk, quantity, weight or value, or by the role of a constituent material in relation to the use of the goods.” 34. The CBSA...

Source: citt_decision (AP-2009-049)

41. On the issue of “essential character”, the Federal Court of Appeal, inMon-Tex Mills Ltd. v. Canada (Commissioner of the Canada Customs and Revenue Agency),21explained that the purpose of an analysis under Rule 3 (b) of theGeneral Rules“. . . is not merely to weigh the various elements of Explanatory Note VIII against one another, but rather to determine the essence or fundamental nature of...

Source: citt_decision (AP-2009-049)

59. The CBSA also submitted that, inAlliance Ro-Na Home Inc. v. Commissioner of the Canada Customs and Revenue Agency,38the Tribunal relied upon certain factors, including the fundamental design of goods and their weight, in order to determine whether they were for domestic purposes. It submitted that, in this case, it is clear from the fundamental design of infant car seats that they are to...

Source: citt_decision (AP-2009-049)

73. For the foregoing reasons, the Tribunal concludes that the goods in issue should be classified under tariff item No. 9401.80.90 as other seats, other than for domestic purposes. 74. The appeal is therefore allowed. 1. R.S.C. 1985 (2d Supp.), c. 1 [Act]. 2. S.C. 1997, c. 36. 3. Tribunal Exhibit AP-2009-049-07A, tab 4, paras. 4-7. 5. Tribunal Exhibit AP-2009-049-33. 6.Transcript of...

Source: citt_decision (AP-2009-049)