Classification of chromatography data station as automatic data processing machine upheld over gas chromatograph heading.

A chromatography data station was held classifiable as an automatic data processing machine under CET sub-heading 8471.00, not as part of a gas chromatograph under CET sub-heading 9027.00. The equipment, consisting of interface cards, monitor, printer, keyboard and cable, received signals from the chromatograph, processed them and displayed results, but operated as an independent assembly. Note 2(a) to Chapter 90 required goods falling under Chapters 84, 85, 90 or 91 to be classified in their respective headings, so mere utility as a component of the chromatograph was not decisive. The prior ruling cited by the assessee was distinguished because the relevant chapter note had not been considered.

---

---

Issues: Whether the chromatography data station was classifiable as part of a gas chromatograph under CET sub-heading 9027.00 or as an automatic data processing machine under CET sub-heading 8471.00.

Analysis: The data station comprised interface cards, monitor, printer, keyboard and interface cable, and it received signals from the gas chromatograph, processed them and displayed results. Although it was necessary for effective functioning of the chromatograph, it was an independent assembly of equipment functioning as an automatic data processing machine. Mere utility as a component of the gas chromatograph was not decisive in view of Note 2(a) to Chapter 90 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, which requires goods included in headings of Chapters 84, 85, 90 or 91 to be classified in their respective headings. The prior decision relied on by the assessee was distinguished on the ground that the relevant chapter note was not considered there.

Conclusion: The data station was correctly classifiable under CET sub-heading 8471.00 and not under CET sub-heading 9027.00, and the assessee's challenge failed.

Final Conclusion: The classification adopted in the impugned order was sustained and the appeal was rejected.

---