Aluminium-based imports treated as dutiable under Item 27 where tariff coverage was not limited to pure aluminium products.

Imported goods made predominantly of aluminium, with 93% aluminium content, were held to fall within Item 27 of the Central Excise Tariff for countervailing duty purposes. The argument that Item 27 covered only aluminium products and excluded aluminium alloy products was rejected because the tariff entry was not so confined. Comparison with copper alloys such as brass and bronze was found unhelpful, as their trade nomenclature differed from the goods in question. Countervailing duty was therefore chargeable on the goods under Item 27.

---

---

Issues: Whether imported goods consisting predominantly of aluminium were liable to countervailing duty under Item 27 of the Central Excise Tariff.

Analysis: The goods were described in the invoice as being made predominantly of aluminium, with aluminium content of 93%. The contention that Item 27 covered only aluminium products and not aluminium alloy products was not accepted. The comparison with copper alloys was found inapposite because the trade nomenclature of copper alloys such as brass and bronze was different from the present goods.

Conclusion: The goods were correctly brought under Item 27 of the Central Excise Tariff and countervailing duty was chargeable. The appeal was rejected.

---