Tariff classification of copper-based goods turns on chapter notes and technical standards, not definitions borrowed from another chapter.

Tariff classification of copper-based goods must follow the relevant chapter and section notes, not definitions taken from a different chapter. For brass granules, the applicable test was predominance by weight under Section XV, and copper predominated; brass was therefore treated as classifiable under CETH 74.06, with the absence of an express brass entry not excluding copper alloys. For cast copper articles, Chapter 72 definitions of ingots and billets were held inapplicable; the Indian Standard for copper and copper alloys governed, and goods intended for further working were treated as billets rather than ingots. On that basis, the goods remained eligible for exemption under Notification No. 9/2003-CE.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether brass granules were classifiable under CETH 7403.21 as claimed by the Revenue or under CETH 74.06 as claimed by the assessee. (ii) Whether the cast form of copper was to be classified as ingots as claimed by the Revenue or as billets as claimed by the assessee.

Issue (i): Whether brass granules were classifiable under CETH 7403.21 as claimed by the Revenue or under CETH 74.06 as claimed by the assessee.

Analysis: The classification turned on the composition of the goods and the relevant Section Notes of Section XV. Composite articles are to be classified on the basis of the base metal predominating by weight. On that criterion, copper predominated in the brass granules. The absence of an express mention of brass in CETH 74.06 did not exclude copper alloys from its scope, and the interpretation adopted by the first appellate authority was consistent with the tariff structure.

Conclusion: Brass granules were correctly classified under CETH 74.06, in favour of the assessee.

Issue (ii): Whether the cast form of copper was to be classified as ingots as claimed by the Revenue or as billets as claimed by the assessee.

Analysis: The definitions in Chapter 72 relating to ingots and billets were held not to govern entries in Chapter 74. For copper and copper alloys, the applicable Indian Standard distinguished billets as solid castings intended for further working and ingots as cast products intended primarily for remelting. Since the Revenue did not establish that the goods were meant for remelting, the cast articles were treated as billets for the purpose of tariff classification and exemption.

Conclusion: The cast articles were correctly classified as billets and remained eligible for exemption under Notification No. 9/2003-CE, in favour of the assessee.

Final Conclusion: The Revenue's challenge to both classifications failed, and the order of the first appellate authority was upheld.

Ratio Decidendi: Tariff classification must be determined by the relevant chapter and section notes applicable to the goods in question, and where composite copper-based articles are involved, predominance by weight and the applicable technical standard govern the classification rather than definitions drawn from a different chapter.

---