Composite machinery classification requires reliable technical proof that separate units operate together as an integrated whole.

Imported assembly-line machinery could not be accepted as a composite machine on the existing record because the technical material did not reliably show that the individual units worked together as one integrated system for battery manufacture. The flow chart and write-up were unauthenticated, the certificate did not clearly confirm composite operation, and there was no expert examination or inspection of the machinery in operation. As the authorities had reached divergent views on the same incomplete material, classification under Heading 8479.89 and the related exemption claim could not be finally sustained without further verification. The matter therefore required de novo consideration with fresh evidence and expert scrutiny.

---

---

Issues: Whether the imported assembly line machinery was shown to be a composite machine working in conjunction so as to merit classification under Heading 8479.89 and the benefit of Notification No. 20/99, and whether the matter required remand for fresh verification.

Analysis: The classification depended on whether the various units, though separately described with individual functions, were established by reliable technical evidence to operate together as one integrated machinery for manufacture of batteries. The available flow chart and write-up were not authenticated, and the certificate filed did not clearly state that all the machines functioned as a composite unit. On the same material, the authorities below had taken divergent views, and the record did not contain expert opinion or examination of the machinery in operation. In such circumstances, the applicability of the section notes governing composite machinery could not be concluded satisfactorily, and the claim to the exemption notification could not be finally accepted without proper verification.

Conclusion: The import was not finally held to be eligible for classification and exemption on the existing material, and the matter was required to go back for de novo consideration with expert examination and fresh evidence.

Ratio Decidendi: Classification of imported machinery as a composite machine, and entitlement to exemption based on such classification, must be supported by reliable technical and expert evidence showing that the units work in conjunction as an integrated whole.

---