Classification of spindle bearings turned on actual imported condition, placing them in the residual bearing heading rather than the bore-based heading.

Integral shaft ball bearings commercially described as spindle bearings were required to be assessed in the condition in which they were imported. Heading 84.62(2) applied only to ball bearings with a bore and a bore diameter not exceeding 60 mm; these goods had no bore because the shaft was integral to the bearing, so a deemed bore could not be substituted. As Heading 84.62(2) was inapplicable, Interpretative Rule 3(c) did not arise. The goods, being bearings and commercially known as ball bearings or spindle bearings, fell within the specific residual category in Heading 84.62(1), making Heading 84.10(3) and Interpretative Rule 4 unnecessary.

---

---

Issues: Whether integral shaft ball bearings, commercially described as spindle bearings, were classifiable under Heading 84.62(1) or Heading 84.62(2) of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975.

Analysis: The goods had to be assessed in the form in which they were imported. Heading 84.62(2) applied only to ball bearings having a bore and a bore diameter not exceeding 60 mm. The imported spindle bearings had no bore at all, because the shaft was integral to the bearing and not inserted through a bore. A deemed bore could not be substituted for the actual condition of the goods. Since Heading 84.62(2) was inapplicable, there was no occasion to invoke Interpretative Rule 3(c). As the goods were admittedly bearings and were commercially known as ball bearings or spindle bearings, they fell within the specific residual category in Heading 84.62(1), and recourse to Heading 84.10(3) or Interpretative Rule 4 was unnecessary.

Conclusion: The goods were correctly classifiable under Heading 84.62(1), and the appeal succeeded with consequential relief.

---