Tariff classification under Rule 2(a): imported goods are judged at import, not by later installation or intended use.

Tariff classification must be determined from the condition of the imported goods at the time of importation, not from the importer's intended use or post-importation assembly. Imported second-hand embroidery machines accompanied by separate Jacquard Control Device Reading Systems were not treated as "computerised embroidery machines" for concessional benefit because the devices were fitted only after customs clearance. General Interpretative Rule 2(a) applies only to complete articles imported unassembled or disassembled, or to incomplete articles already having the essential character of the finished goods; it does not extend to goods that require further working after import to acquire the claimed character.

---

---

Issues: Whether the imported second-hand embroidery machines along with Jacquard Control Device Reading Systems were classifiable as "computerised embroidery machines" for the concessional benefit under Notification No. 11/97-Cus dated 01.03.1997 by applying General Interpretative Rule 2(a).

Analysis: The imported goods consisted of old and used mechanical embroidery machines and separate Jacquard Control Devices. The devices had not been installed on the machines before importation and customs clearance; they were fitted only afterwards at the appellant's premises. Classification had therefore to be determined with reference to the state of the goods at the time of importation and not by the importer's intention or the later use of the goods. General Interpretative Rule 2(a) applies to complete or finished articles presented unassembled or disassembled, or to incomplete articles having the essential character of the finished article, but it does not cover goods that require further working or post-importation assembly to acquire the claimed character.

Conclusion: The imported goods were not "computerised embroidery machines" as presented at the time of import. The claim to concessional classification failed and the appeal was rejected.

Final Conclusion: Classification under the tariff was to be determined from the condition of the goods on import, and post-importation installation could not convert the imported consignment into a finished computerised machine for concessional treatment.

Ratio Decidendi: For tariff classification, the goods must answer the description of the claimed article in their condition as presented at importation; Rule 2(a) covers only unassembled or incomplete goods that already have the essential character of the finished article and do not require further working after import.

---