CLASSIFIED UNDER A HEADING IN CHAPTER 92 OF THE CCT IN THE LIGHT OF NOTE 1 ( C ) TO THAT CHAPTER BECAUSE , ALTHOUGH IT HAD TO BE COMBINED WITH THE VIDEO RECORDER IN ORDER TO FUNCTION , IT WAS NOT DESIGNED TO BE INCORPORATED IN IT ; NOR WAS THERE ANY PROVISION MADE FOR HOUSING IT WITH THE VIDEO RECORDER IN THE SAME CABINET .
6 FOLLOWING AN UNSUCCESSFUL OBJECTION TELEFUNKEN BROUGHT AN ACTION FOR AN ORDER THAT THE TIMER/TUNER SHOULD BE CLASSIFIED UNDER SUBHEADING 92.13 D OF THE CCT ( ' OTHER PARTS AND ACCESSORIES OF APPARATUS FALLING WITHIN HEADING NO 92.11 ' ). IN SUPPORT OF ITS ACTION TELEFUNKEN ARGUED THAT THE TIMER/TUNER COULD NOT FUNCTION ON ITS OWN AND COULD NOT THEREFORE BE CONSIDERED A TELEVISION RECEPTION APPARATUS WITHIN THE MEANING OF TARIFF HEADING NO 85.15 . NOR WAS IT PART OF SUCH AN APPARATUS ; IT WAS A SUPPLEMENT TO THE TUNER OF THE VR 510 VIDEO RECORDER AND THEREFORE A PART OR ACCESSORY OF THAT VIDEO RECORDER , WHICH FELL WITHIN CHAPTER 92 OF THE CCT .
7 THE BUNDESFINANZHOF TOOK THE VIEW THAT ITS DECISION DEPENDED ON THE ANSWERS TO CERTAIN QUESTIONS CONCERNING THE INTERPRETATION OF THE CCT WHICH HAD NOT YET BEEN RESOLVED BY THE COURT AND THEREFORE REFERRED THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS TO THE COURT FOR A PRELIMINARY RULING :
' ( 1 ) IS THE COMMON CUSTOMS TARIFF TO BE INTERPRETED AS MEANING THAT AN APPARATUS DESCRIBED AS A TIMER/TUNER , CONSISTING OF A COLOUR-TELEVISION RECEPTION COMPONENT WITH A 12-PROGRAMME MEMORY AND OF A TIMER WHICH CAN BE PRE-SET TO SWITCH THE APPARATUS ON AND OFF UP TO 10 DAYS IN ADVANCE , WHICH MUST BE COMBINED WITH A VIDEO RECORDER OF A SPECIFIC DESIGN IN ORDER TO CONVERT INTO VISIBLE FORM TRANSMISSIONS RECEIVED , IS TO BE CLASSIFIED UNDER HEADING NO 92.13 D OF THE COMMON CUSTOMS TARIFF?
( 2)IF QUESTION 1 IS ANSWERED IN THE NEGATIVE , WHICH OTHER HEADING OF THE COMMON CUSTOMS TARIFF IS THE APPARATUS TO BE CLASSIFIED UNDER?
'
8 ACCORDING TO THE BUNDESFINANZHOF , THE FIRST QUESTION WHICH ARISES IS WHETHER THE TIMER/TUNER SHOULD BE CLASSIFIED UNDER TARIFF SUBHEADING 92.13 D ; IT CONSIDERS THAT THE ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION DEPENDS ON WHETHER THE TIMER/TUNER IS TO BE REGARDED AS A PART OR ACCESSORY OF AN APPARATUS FALLING UNDER TARIFF SUBHEADING 92.11 B . IN ITS VIEW , THE VR 510 VIDEO RECORDER MIGHT BE SUCH AN APPARATUS .
9 THE BUNDESFINANZHOF CONSIDERS THAT , IF THE TIMER/TUNER CANNOT BE REGARDED AS A PART OR ACCESSORY OF AN APPARATUS FALLING UNDER TARIFF SUBHEADING 92.11 B , THE QUESTION ARISES WHETHER IT SHOULD BE CLASSIFIED UNDER THAT SUBHEADING AS AN INDEPENDENT APPARATUS ; IN THAT CONNECTION THE BUNDESFINANZHOF POINTS OUT THAT IT IS CLEAR FROM THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE PARTIES THAT THE TIMER/TUNER IS SOLELY INTENDED FOR USE WITH THE VR 510 VIDEO RECORDER .
10 FINALLY , THE BUNDESFINANZHOF CONSIDERS THAT , IF