WAS ADOPTED , CONFERS ON THE COMMISSION THE POWER TO ADOPT THE PROVISIONS REQUIRED FOR THE APPLICATION OF THE NOMENCLATURE OF THE COMMON CUSTOMS TARIFF AS REGARDS CLASSIFICATION OF GOODS .
THE SECOND RECITAL IN THE PREAMBLE TO THAT REGULATION EXPLAINS THAT THOSE PROVISIONS SHOULD SPECIFY THE CONTENT OF THE HEADINGS OR SUBHEADINGS OF THE COMMON CUSTOMS TARIFF WITHOUT AMENDING THE TEXT THEREOF .
FROM THE THIRD RECITAL IN THE PREAMBLE AND ARTICLE 4 IT APPEARS THAT THE PROVISIONS THUS ADOPTED BY THE COMMISSION CONCERN THE MEASURES WHICH MAY BE NECESSARY FOR CLASSIFYING CERTAIN GOODS IN THE TARIFF AND SIMILARLY THEIR INCLUSION UNDER A GIVEN HEADING OR SUBHEADING .
TO THAT END THE REGULATION SET UP A COMMITTEE ON COMMON CUSTOMS TARIFF NOMENCLATURE AND STATED , IN THE THIRD RECITAL , THAT THE PROVISIONS CONCERNING THOSE MEASURES RELATE TO A PARTICULARLY TECHNICAL FIELD AND CLOSE CO-OPERATION IS REQUIRED BETWEEN THE MEMBER STATES AND THE COMMISSION WHEN DRAWING THEM UP .
6IT IS CLEAR FROM THOSE RULES THAT IN THIS FIELD THE COUNCIL HAS CONFERRED ON THE COMMISSION , ACTING IN CO-OPERATION WITH THE CUSTOMS EXPERTS OF THE MEMBER STATES , A WIDE DISCRETION AS TO THE CHOICE BETWEEN TWO OR MORE TARIFF HEADINGS IN WHICH A GIVEN PRODUCT MIGHT BE CLASSIFIED .
7ARTICLE 1 OF REGULATION NO 1669/77 DOES NOT AMEND THE TEXT OF THE COMMON CUSTOMS TARIFF BUT SPECIFIES THE CONTENT OF A TARIFF SUBHEADING WITH REGARD TO A GIVEN PRODUCT .
IT IS NECESSARY TO EXAMINE WHETHER , ALTHOUGH IT REPEATS WITHOUT AMENDMENT THE TEXT OF SUBHEADING 02.02 B I , REGULATION NO 1669/77 HAS NEVERTHELESS NOT HAD THE EFFECT OF MAKING A SUBSTANTIVE AMENDMENT TO THE TARIFF .
8IT APPEARS FROM THE THIRD RECITAL THAT ARTICLE 1 OF REGULATION NO 1669/77 SPECIFIES THE TARIFF CLASSIFICATION OF THE PRODUCTS REFERRED TO THEREIN HAVING REGARD TO THE TARIFF SUBHEADINGS OF CHAPTER 2 , SECTION I , RELATING ON THE ONE HAND TO ' ' POULTRY CUTS ( EXCLUDING OFFALS ): BONED OR BONELESS ' ' AND , ON THE OTHER , TO ' ' OFFALS ' ' .
THE COMMON CUSTOMS TARIFF DOES NOT CONTAIN A LEGAL DEFINITION OF EITHER OF THOSE PRODUCTS .
IT IS RECOGNIZED THAT AS SUCH A DEFINITION IS LACKING THE TARIFF CLASSIFICATION OF THE PRODUCTS IN QUESTION HAS NOT ALWAYS BEEN FREE OF UNCERTAINTY FOR THE NATIONAL AUTHORITIES IN THE MEMBER STATES AND IT WAS IN ORDER TO REMOVE SUCH UNCERTAINTY THAT THE COMMISSION DECIDED THAT IT WAS NECESSARY TO REFER THE MATTER FOR EXAMINATION BY THE COMMITTEE ON COMMON CUSTOMS TARIFF NOMENCLATURE IN THE CONTEXT OF THE PROCEDURE LAID DOWN IN ARTICLE 3 OF REGULATION NO 97/69 OF THE COUNCIL .
FOLLOWING SUCH A PROCEDURE AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE OPINION EXPRESSED BY THAT COMMITTEE ARTICLE 1 OF COMMISSION REGULATION NO 1669/77 WAS ADOPTED .
ADMINISTRATIVE PRACTICE WITH REGARD TO TARIFF CLASSIFICATION OR COMMERCIAL PRACTICE CURRENT IN A MEMBER STATE CANNOT MAKE UP FOR THE ABSENCE OF SUCH A REGULATION AS THE COMMON