Customs classification must rest on independent evidence, not mere importer documents, when determining the true heading of goods.

Imported goods were disputed as motor vehicle parts under Heading 87.08 or forged iron or steel articles under Heading 26.19, but the lower authorities' classification was not supported by acceptable reasons. Mere reliance on drawings, catalogues, samples, or a flow chart supplied by the importer was held insufficient to determine the true classification or to conclude that the goods had lost the essential character of motor vehicle parts. Independent evidence was required before rejecting the claim under the forged articles heading. The appellate order was set aside and the matter remanded for reconsideration on merits after giving the importer an opportunity to produce evidence.

---

---

Issues: Whether the imported goods were classifiable as motor vehicle parts under Heading 87.08 or as forged iron or steel articles under Heading 26.19, and whether the classification could be sustained on the materials relied upon by the lower authorities.

Analysis: The lower orders were found to be unsupported by acceptable reasons. Mere reference to drawings, catalogues, samples, or a flow chart supplied by the importer was insufficient to establish the true classification of the goods. Independent evidence was required before concluding that the goods had not acquired the essential character of motor vehicle parts and before rejecting the claim under the heading relating to forged articles.

Conclusion: The matter was not finally decided on classification. The appellate order was set aside and the case was sent back for reconsideration on merits after the importer was given an opportunity to produce evidence.

---