Tariff classification of seat damper: competing headings rejected and matter remanded for fresh determination

A seat damper was examined for tariff classification under Headings 87.08 and 94.01. The product was found not to form part of the seat, because the seat remained complete without it, and it was also not treated as a motor vehicle part or accessory under Heading 87.08, as it could not be regarded as a shock absorber. Since both competing entries were found inapplicable, the matter was remanded for fresh classification under the correct tariff heading after considering the assessee's submissions.

---

---

Issues: Whether the seat damper was classifiable under Heading 87.08, Heading 94.01, or required fresh classification under the correct tariff heading.

Analysis: The goods were held not to be part of the seat, since the seat remained complete even without the damper, and not to be motor vehicle parts or accessories falling under Heading 87.08, as the product could not be treated as a shock absorber. The rival headings were therefore found inapplicable. In such a situation, the proper course was to send the matter back for determination of the correct classification after considering the appellants' submissions.

Conclusion: The product was not classifiable under either Heading 87.08 or Heading 94.01 on the reasoning adopted, and the matter was remanded for fresh classification by the adjudicating authority.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the competing tariff entries are both found inapplicable, the authority must determine the correct classification afresh rather than merely sustain the existing classification.

---