Tariff classification of coiled cord must first test specific heading coverage before resorting to the residuary parts note.

Coiled cord classification under the customs tariff turned on whether the goods fell within their own specific heading before any resort to the residuary parts provision. Section Note 2(a) requires goods that are themselves included in a heading of Chapter 84 or 85 to be classified in that heading, and Section Note 2(b) applies only after that possibility is excluded. The Tribunal erred by moving directly to Section Note 2(b) without first testing coverage under Section Note 2(a). The classification adopted by the Tribunal was therefore set aside in favour of the Revenue.

---

---

Issues: Whether the coiled cord was classifiable under Tariff Heading 85.17 or Tariff Heading 85.44, and whether Section Note 2(a) had to be considered before resorting to Section Note 2(b).

Analysis: The competing tariff headings covered electric apparatus for line telephony and insulated electric conductors. Section Note 2(a) requires parts which are goods included in any heading of Chapter 84 or 85 to be classified in their respective headings. Section Note 2(b) applies only to other parts, that is, parts not covered by Section Note 2(a). The Tribunal had proceeded directly to Section Note 2(b) without first examining whether the goods were classifiable under their own heading, which was an error in law. The residuary or alternative operation of Section Note 2(b) could arise only after excluding coverage under Section Note 2(a).

Conclusion: The goods were not to be classified by directly invoking Section Note 2(b), and the Tribunal's order was erroneous.

Final Conclusion: The appeals succeeded and the classification adopted by the Tribunal was set aside in favour of the Revenue.

Ratio Decidendi: A tariff note dealing with other parts can be applied only after first determining that the goods are not classifiable in their own specific heading under the relevant chapter note.

---