Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the bearing analyser BEA-52 was correctly classifiable under the residuary Heading No. 90.28(1) of the Customs Tariff, or under Heading No. 90.28(4) as the non-electric counterpart of an instrument falling under Heading No. 90.25.
Analysis: The product literature showed that BEA-52 measures lubrication and mechanical condition in bearings, checks fatigue and surface damage, and operates by analysing shock pulse patterns. On that basis, the instrument was found to be an apparatus for checking the condition of bearings rather than a device for physical or chemical analysis or for measuring viscosity, porosity, expansion, surface tension or similar parameters within Heading No. 90.25. The scope of Heading No. 90.28(4) was treated as covering electrical instruments whose non-electric counterparts fall under Heading No. 90.25, while Heading No. 90.28(1) was regarded as residuary and applicable only if no other specific heading covered the goods.
Conclusion: The bearing analyser BEA-52 was not classifiable under Heading No. 90.28(1) and was correctly classifiable under Heading No. 90.28(4) of the Customs Tariff.
Final Conclusion: The classification adopted by the lower authority was set aside and the refund claim succeeded on the tariff classification issue.
Ratio Decidendi: Where a product is specifically covered by a tariff heading or by the non-electric counterpart provision linked to that heading, it cannot be placed in a residuary entry.