Aircraft parts classification turns on principal use, not base-metal composition, for goods used solely with aircraft.

Goods suitable solely or principally for use with aircraft are to be classified under CTH 8803 under Note 3 of Section XVII, while Note 2 excludes only articles of general use of base metal. The text states that aluminium bushes, flanges, fittings, bolts and grommets described and cleared as aircraft parts were not to be diverted to Chapters 73, 76, 81 or 82 merely because of their material composition. It further notes that contrary authorities were fact-specific and that the principal-use approach supports aircraft-heading classification, with the demand, reclassification and penalty said not to survive on that basis.

---

---

Issues: Whether the imported aluminium bushes, flanges, fittings, bolts, grommets and similar goods were classifiable as parts and accessories of aircraft under CTH 8803 or as general articles of base metal under Chapters 73, 76, 81 and 82, and whether the penalty and demand could survive if the classification under CTH 8803 was upheld.

Analysis: The governing scheme under Note 2 of Section XVII excludes from the expression "parts and accessories" articles of general use of base metal, while Note 3 of Section XVII applies the sole or principal use test to parts or accessories suitable for use solely or principally with articles of Chapters 86 to 88. The goods in question were not disputed to be used in aircraft, and the record showed that they were described and cleared as aircraft parts. On that basis, they fell within the aircraft-heading classification and could not be diverted to the general-use headings merely because they were made of aluminium or other base metal. The reliance placed on contrary authorities was found distinguishable on their facts, while the principle recognised in the cited Supreme Court decision supported classification according to principal use.

Conclusion: The goods were correctly classifiable under CTH 8803 as parts and accessories of aircraft, and the demand, reclassification and penalty could not stand.

Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded and the impugned order was set aside, with consequential relief according to law.

Ratio Decidendi: Where goods are suitable solely or principally for use with aircraft, Note 3 of Section XVII requires classification under the aircraft heading, and they cannot be shifted to general-use base-metal headings covered by the exclusion in Note 2.

---