Tariff classification for refrigerator parts and asbestos gaskets upheld as customs classifications were sustained.

Domestic refrigerators were treated as refrigerating equipment for tariff purposes, so compressor components meant for such use fell within the specific entry for gas compressors rather than the residuary classification. An asbestos discharge tube gasket was excluded from Chapter 84 by the chapter note and was classifiable under the heading for asbestos articles. The special rubber grommets were not shown, on the evidence, to warrant a different classification, and no specific challenge supported interference with the overload protector assembly classification. The customs classifications were therefore sustained across the disputed items.

---

---

Issues: (i) whether the compressor components imported for use in domestic refrigerators were classifiable under Tariff Item 84.11(3) as gas compressors for use in refrigerating equipment or under Tariff Item 84.11(1) as not elsewhere specified; (ii) whether the discharge tube gasket made of asbestos was excluded from Chapter 84 and classifiable under Heading 68.01/16; (iii) whether the special rubber grommets and overload protector assembly were correctly classified under the headings adopted by the Customs authorities.

Issue (i): whether the compressor components imported for use in domestic refrigerators were classifiable under Tariff Item 84.11(3) as gas compressors for use in refrigerating equipment or under Tariff Item 84.11(1) as not elsewhere specified

Analysis: Tariff Item 84.11 contained competing entries between gas compressors for use in refrigerating equipment and the residuary entry for goods not elsewhere specified. A domestic refrigerator was treated as refrigerating equipment for the purpose of the tariff, and the distinction drawn in another tariff item did not support exclusion of refrigerators from that expression. The imported compressor components, being meant for refrigerators, therefore fell within the specific entry rather than the residuary one.

Conclusion: The classification under Tariff Item 84.11(3) was correct and the challenge to that classification failed.

Issue (ii): whether the discharge tube gasket made of asbestos was excluded from Chapter 84 and classifiable under Heading 68.01/16

Analysis: Chapter Note 1(a) to Chapter 84 excluded articles falling under Chapter 68. The discharge tube gasket was conceded to be made of asbestos, and Heading 68.01/16 covered articles of asbestos. On that basis, the goods could not remain within Chapter 84 and had to be classified under the heading corresponding to asbestos articles.

Conclusion: The discharge tube gasket was rightly classifiable under Heading 68.01/16 and not under Chapter 84.

Issue (iii): whether the special rubber grommets and overload protector assembly were correctly classified under the headings adopted by the Customs authorities

Analysis: No reliable evidence was produced as to the nature of the special rubber grommets, including whether they were hardened or unhardened rubber, and the claim made for a different classification was not substantiated. As regards the overload protector assembly, no specific plea was raised to support interference with the departmental classification.

Conclusion: The classifications adopted by the Customs authorities for these items were not disturbed.

Final Conclusion: The tariff classifications made by the Customs authorities were sustained across the disputed items, and the appeal failed in full.

Ratio Decidendi: For tariff purposes, a domestic refrigerator is refrigerating equipment, and an article expressly covered by a chapter note exclusion cannot be classified in the excluded chapter despite its functional relation to the equipment.

---