classification. The Ld. Advocate submitted that the issue revolved over a very narrow compass. If the imported goods are individually sheathed fibre cables, as claimed by them, then its classification would be under chapter 85, otherwise under chapter 90. Therefore, it was crucial to decide whether the imported goods were individual sheathed fibre or not. He submitted that the question of use or function becomes irrelevant when the heading itself provides for the basis of classification. The question of technical literature or information available in public domain will have little or no consequences unless it is shown that all OPGW products have the same characteristics and features. He stated that in the absence of test results, the contention of the appellant is required to be accepted and the product is therefore to be classified under chapter 85 and their appeal is required to be allowed, with consequential relief. 3.2 The Ld. Authorized Representative submitted that the LAA has, based on the technical, commercial and legal literature clearly demonstrated that grounding and fault current conduction were the main functions of the OPGW. The actual issue here is whether the term "sheathed" in the tariff schedule means coating as contested by the appellant or "covering" as held by the LAA. Based on the Chapter notes and Explanatory Notes to the Chapters 85 and 90, it is seen that if individual fibre is sheathed, then that will fall under the heading 8544 and under the heading 9001, if otherwise. The appellant submits that as the optical fibre will only have core and cladding, the coating is to be treated as sheath. This submission leads to a surmise that the fibres falling under the heading will not have coating and those falling under
