https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=582 Bullet proof doors and windows with aluminium frames and glass were held classifiable by their commercial identity and essential character, not by the mere presence of glass. The Tribunal treated the articles as composite goods marketed and invoiced as doors and windows, with the aluminium frame forming an integral part of the product. It applied the interpretative approach that a composite article should not be classified as a glass article merely because glass provides a functional attribute. Heading 7610, which covers aluminium doors, windows and their frames, was found to be the proper classification, and Heading 7020 for articles of glass was rejected. en-us Wed, 07 Dec 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Sun, 13 Apr 2008 16:26:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=582 Bullet proof doors and windows with aluminium frames and glass were held classifiable by their commercial identity and essential character, not by the mere presence of glass. The Tribunal treated the articles as composite goods marketed and invoiced as doors and windows, with the aluminium frame forming an integral part of the product. It applied the interpretative approach that a composite article should not be classified as a glass article merely because glass provides a functional attribute. Heading 7610, which covers aluminium doors, windows and their frames, was found to be the proper classification, and Heading 7020 for articles of glass was rejected. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 07 Dec 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=582