Predominant-metal classification governed customs duty liability, sustaining classification as an iron alloy and the differential demand.

Imported goods were classified under sub-heading 7325.99 because the test report showed iron as the predominant constituent by weight. Applying Section Note 5(a) to Section XV of the Tariff Schedule, an alloy of base metals is classified by the metal that predominates by weight over the others. The goods were not treated as ferro-alloys or master alloys, so the tariff note governed classification. As goods under that heading attracted a higher duty rate on the Bill of Entry date, the differential basic customs duty and special additional duty were upheld.

---

---

Issues: Whether the imported goods were correctly classified under sub-heading 7325.99 on the basis of the predominant metal content, and whether the differential basic customs duty and special additional duty were rightly demanded.

Analysis: The classification dispute turned on the test report furnished by the importer, which showed iron to be the predominant constituent by weight. Under Section Note 5(a) to Section XV of the Tariff Schedule, an alloy of base metals is to be classified according to the metal which predominates by weight over each of the other metals. The goods did not fall within the definitions of ferro-alloys or master alloys, and therefore the note governed their classification. On that basis, the goods were classifiable as an iron alloy under sub-heading 7325.99. Since, on the date of filing of the Bill of Entry, goods under that heading attracted duty at the higher rate, the importer was not entitled to the lower rates applied at clearance.

Conclusion: The classification under sub-heading 7325.99 was sustained and the demand for differential basic customs duty and special additional duty was upheld against the assessee.

---