Vickers Hardness Tester exemption upheld where additional testing methods did not alter its commercial identity.

A Vickers Hardness Tester remained covered by Notification No. 49/78 even though it could also test hardness by Knoop and Scratch methods. The decisive factor was that the goods were described in the bill of entry, invoice and technical literature as a Vickers Hardness Tester, and the machine was commercially known by that description. Its ability to perform additional testing methods did not exclude it from the exemption where the notification extended benefit to the instrument as such, consistent with an earlier Tribunal view on a similar machine. The exemption was therefore available and the appeal succeeded.

---

---

Issues: Whether a Vickers Hardness Tester remains entitled to the benefit of Notification No. 49/78 when the instrument is also capable of testing hardness by other methods such as Knoop and Scratch.

Analysis: The item was described in the bill of entry and invoice as a Vickers Hardness Tester, and the technical literature showed that it could also perform additional hardness tests. The decisive consideration was that the notification extended the benefit to a Vickers Hardness Tester as such, and the machine was commercially known by that description. The fact that the equipment could perform more than one testing method did not take it outside the scope of the notification, especially where an earlier Tribunal view on a similar machine had already allowed the exemption on the same principle.

Conclusion: The benefit of Notification No. 49/78 was available, and the appeal was allowed in favour of the appellant.

---