Agenzia delle Dogane and Ufficio di Verona dell’Agenzia delle Dogane v ADL American Dataline Srl.
Date: 2014-11-06
32. It is settled case-law that, in the interests of legal certainty and ease of verification, the decisive criterion for the classification of goods for customs purposes is in general to be sought in their objective characteristics and properties as defined in the wording of the relevant heading of the CN and in the section or chapter notes ( Delphi Deutschland , C‑423/10, EU:C:2011:315, paragraph 23 and case-law cited).
33. The explanatory notes drawn up by the Commission as regards the CN and by the WCO as regards the HS are an important aid to the interpretation of the scope of the various tariff headings but do not have legally binding force ( Delphi Deutschland , EU:C:2011:315, paragraph 24 and case-law cited).
34. Moreover, for the purposes of classification under the appropriate heading, it should be recalled that the intended use of a product may constitute an objective criterion for classification if it is inherent to the product, and that inherent character must be capable of being assessed on the basis of the product’s objective characteristics and properties (see the judgment in Olicom , C‑142/06, EU:C:2007:449, paragraph 18).
37. It follows from the wording of that note that the ‘specific function’ performed by a machine working with an automatic data-processing machine must be a function ‘other than data processing’ (judgment in Kip Europe and Others , C‑362/07 and C‑363/07, EU:C:2008:710, paragraph 32 and case-law cited).
38. Furthermore, it follows from the general scheme and purpose of that note that the expression ‘are to be classified in the headings appropriate to their respective functions’ does not seek to have one function take priority over others also performed by the apparatus to be classified and which also constitute data processing, but to prevent apparatus whose function has nothing to do with data processing from being classified under heading 8471 for the sole reason that they incorporate an automatic data-processing machine or work in connection with such a machine (judgment in Kip Europe and Others , EU:C:2008:710, paragraph 33).
39. With regard to the concept of ‘data-processing’, the first paragraph of Chapter I of the Explanatory Note to the HS concerning heading 8471 of the CN provides that such processing consists in handling information of all kinds, in pre-established logical sequences and for a specific purpose or purposes. Moreover, in the light both of the general scheme of that explanatory note and its context, it is apparent that that concept must be understood as involving, in principle, the exploitation of data, such as recording, modifying, storing, converting or publishing that data (see judgment in Data I/O , C‑370/08, EU:C:2010:284, paragraph 35).
41. Moreover, with regard to the interpretation of the word ‘loudspeaker’ in heading 8518 of the CN, it is necessary to take into account Point B of the explanatory note of the HS relating to heading 8518, even for the period of importation of the goods concerned prior to the entry into force of that explanatory note. Since the wording of that heading, as regards ‘loudspeakers’, as amended by Regulation No 1789/2003, is identical to that of the same heading of the CN, as amended by Regulations No 2388/2000, 2031/2001 and 1832/2002, a different meaning should not, in principle, be given to the word ‘loudspeaker’ from that which should be given to it taking into account Point B of that explanatory note (see, to that effect, the judgment in Delphi Deutschland , EU:C:2011:315, paragraph 26).