Tariff classification requires evidence that goods meet the claimed heading description; unsupported classification claims will fail.

Classification under Heading 84.61 depended on whether the imported system flow regulating valve answered the description of sub-item (2). The record contained no evidence showing that the goods fell within any of the categories covered by that sub-heading, so there was no basis to disturb the lower authority's classification. The appellant's claimed classification was therefore not accepted, the impugned order was upheld, and the appeal was rejected.

---

---

Issues: Whether the imported article, described as a system flow regulating valve, was classifiable under sub-item (1) or sub-item (2) of Heading 84.61 of the Customs Tariff Act.

Analysis: The question turned on whether the goods answered the description of any of the entries in sub-heading (2). The record contained no evidence showing that the imported article fell within any of the categories covered by that sub-heading. In the absence of material to bring the goods within the claimed classification, there was no basis to disturb the finding of the lower authority.

Conclusion: The classification claimed by the appellant was not accepted, and the appeal failed.

Final Conclusion: The impugned classification order was upheld and the appeal stood rejected.

Ratio Decidendi: Goods are to be classified under a tariff sub-heading only if the evidence shows that they answer the description of that heading.

---