Copper exemption for rods upheld where wire bars counted as crude copper and added metals did not defeat predominance.

Copper and brass rods manufactured from old scrap and copper wire bars were treated as falling within Notification No. 119/66-C.E. because copper in crude form was interpreted broadly enough to include wire bars, and the wire bars were regarded as bars within the tariff description. The addition of other metals such as zinc and tin for technological necessity did not defeat the exemption where copper content remained predominant. The exemption was therefore available, and denial of the benefit was unjustified.

---

---

Issues: Whether the respondent was entitled to exemption under Notification No. 119/66-C.E. for copper and brass rods manufactured from old scrap, copper wire bars, zinc and tin, on the ground that wire bars formed part of copper in crude form and that the copper content was predominant.

Analysis: The products were manufactured from old scrap and copper wire bars, with other metals added as a technological necessity. The expression copper in any crude form was treated as wide enough to include wire bars, and wire bars were regarded as bars within the tariff description. The later departmental circular also clarified that the exemption under Notification No. 119/66-C.E. would remain available where other metals such as zinc, lead, tin or nickel were added, provided the copper content was predominant.

Conclusion: The respondent was entitled to the exemption, and the denial of benefit was not justified.

---