Common parlance and functional character determined exemption for projector lenses, with the glass exclusion held inapplicable.

Projector lens imported as parts of projectors was held eligible for Notification No. 69/87 because its commercial identity and primary functional character were as a projector component, not as glass goods. The accepted classification under Heading 98.06 meant the exemption question turned on common parlance and functional use, so the material composition of the lens could not by itself attract the exclusion for articles of glass. On that basis, the denial of exemption was incorrect in law and refund with consequential relief was held to follow.

---

---

Issues: Whether projector lens imported as parts of projectors was entitled to the benefit of Notification No. 69/87 despite being treated as articles of glass.

Analysis: The classification under Heading 98.06 had already been accepted, so the only question was eligibility for the notification. The determining principle applied was the common parlance or functional character test, under which an article is identified by its primary use and the perception of the consumer or user. On that basis, a mounted projector lens would be associated with a projector rather than with glass as such. The exclusion for articles of glass could not be applied merely because the goods contained glass, when their commercial identity and function were as projector parts.

Conclusion: The benefit of Notification No. 69/87 was available to the assessee, and the denial of exemption was in law.

Final Conclusion: The appeals succeeded and the refund claim was liable to be allowed with consequential relief.

Ratio Decidendi: Classification for exemption purposes depends on the article's identity in common parlance and its primary functional character, not on its material composition alone.

---