https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=49803 For tariff classification, the decisive test was whether the washing machines possessed the essential mechanical features and intended use required by Heading 84.51; they did not, so they remained classifiable under Heading 84.50. The tribunal held that incidental factors such as weight, capacity, or user profile were irrelevant to the classification exercise, and the constructional differences relied on by the appellant were insufficient to bring the machines within the competing heading. The appeal therefore failed. en-us Mon, 15 May 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 17 Aug 2010 15:47:37 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=49803 For tariff classification, the decisive test was whether the washing machines possessed the essential mechanical features and intended use required by Heading 84.51; they did not, so they remained classifiable under Heading 84.50. The tribunal held that incidental factors such as weight, capacity, or user profile were irrelevant to the classification exercise, and the constructional differences relied on by the appellant were insufficient to bring the machines within the competing heading. The appeal therefore failed. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 15 May 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=49803