Central excise classification of dished ends favoured specific iron and steel entry over residuary classification.

Rough, unmachined and unlinned forged products known as dished ends were held classifiable under Item 25(13)(iv) of the old Central Excise Tariff rather than the residuary Item 68. Item 25 was read as covering iron and steel products in illustrative forms, so the phrase "such as" was treated as non-exhaustive. The shape of the article was not decisive where the goods remained iron and steel products, and residuary classification applied only if no specific entry covered them. Because the goods had been treated within the iron and steel tariff and were not shown to fall outside Item 25, the Revenue's appeals failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether rough, unmachined and unlinned forged products known as dished ends were classifiable under Item No. 25(13)(iv) of the old Central Excise Tariff or under the residuary Item No. 68.

Analysis: Item No. 25 covered iron and steel and products thereof, including various forms made from sheets, plates and universal plates. The expression "such as" in the description of forms indicated an illustrative, not exhaustive, enumeration. The shape of the article was not decisive where the goods remained products of iron and steel capable of classification under the specific tariff entry. The residuary Item No. 68 could be applied only when the goods were not otherwise classifiable under a specific entry. The goods had all along been treated within the iron and steel tariff and were not shown to fall outside Item No. 25 merely because further processing was required before use.

Conclusion: Dished ends were correctly classifiable under Item No. 25(13)(iv) and not under Item No. 68, and the Revenue's appeals failed.

---