Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether guy rod is classifiable as a threaded article under Heading 73.18 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, or as a part of structure under Heading 73.08.
Analysis: The decisive test was the actual function and manner of use of the article. Guy rod, as used in the guy rod assembly, did not itself fasten the pole in the manner of bolts, screws or similar threaded articles. Its role was to support and keep the pole with overhead electrical equipment in an upright position. The fastening, if any, was attributable to the entire assembly rather than to the guy rod by itself. The Explanatory Notes to Heading 73.18 covered fastening articles such as bolts and screws, whereas Heading 73.08 covered structures and parts of structures that remain in position once erected. On that basis, guy rod was treated as a part of the structure.
Conclusion: Heading 73.18 was held to be inapplicable, and guy rod was held classifiable under Heading 73.08. The classification in favour of the assessee was accepted.
Ratio Decidendi: For tariff classification, the controlling consideration is the article's essential function and commercial identity; an item that merely supports a structure and is not itself a fastening article is not classifiable as a threaded fastening article merely because it is used in an assembly that secures a structure.