Tariff classification of castings turns on proof-machining status and factual findings, with Rule 2(a) not applied.

Aluminium and zinc castings described as unmachined, or machined only up to proof-machining and fettling, were treated as falling under the assessee's claimed tariff headings rather than as machinery component parts under Rule 2(a). The decisive factual position was that the assessee consistently maintained that any further machining occurred at the customer's end, and the lower authorities did not record a clear finding rejecting that plea. In those circumstances, and because the dispute was old, remand for fresh fact-finding was considered unnecessary. The accepted factual basis aligned with prior Tribunal decisions relied on by the assessee, and the rival classification was rejected.

---

---

Issues: Whether the aluminium and zinc castings, stated to be unmachined or machined only up to proof-machining stage, were to be classified as component parts under the machinery chapters by applying Rule 2(a) of the tariff interpretation rules, or under the headings claimed by the assessee; and whether remand was necessary for a fresh factual finding.

Analysis: The assessee had consistently taken a specific factual plea before the lower authorities that the goods were only unmachined castings or proof-machined castings up to fettling stage, and that any further machining was done at the customer's end. The lower authorities did not record any clear rebuttal of that plea, but proceeded on a separate line of reasoning by treating the samples as having acquired the essential character of component parts and invoking Rule 2(a). In the absence of a specific factual finding contrary to the assessee's case, and considering the age of the dispute, remand was held unnecessary. The accepted factual position brought the matter within the scope of the Tribunal decisions relied upon, which supported the assessee's claimed classification.

Conclusion: The castings were accepted as unmachined or only proof-machined, the rival classification was rejected, and the appeals were allowed with consequential relief.

---