Rule 173L refund on reprocessed biscuits allowed where goods remained of the same class despite different varieties.

Biscuits returned for reprocessing and later cleared in different varieties were still goods of the same class for Rule 173L. The rule required identity of class, not identity of variety, and both the returned and reprocessed products remained biscuits within the same excisable description. Denying refund solely because the finished varieties differed would defeat the rule's purpose and create double incidence of duty on the same goods. On that basis, the refund claim was maintainable and revision was allowed in favour of the assessee.

---

---

Issues: Whether biscuits brought back for reprocessing and cleared after reprocessing into different varieties remained goods of the same class for the purpose of Rule 173L, so as to entitle the claimant to refund and avoid double payment of duty.

Analysis: The expression "class" in Rule 173L was not defined. The goods returned for reprocessing and the goods cleared after reprocessing were both biscuits. The rule required the goods to be of the same class, not of the same variety. Since biscuits fell within the same excisable category and the tariff item contained no further sub-divisions relevant to this distinction, the reprocessed goods answered the description of goods of the same class. Denial of refund on the ground that the varieties differed would defeat the object of the rule and result in double incidence of duty on the same goods.

Conclusion: The reprocessed biscuits were goods of the same class. The refund claim was maintainable and the revision was allowed in favour of the assessee.

Ratio Decidendi: For the purpose of Rule 173L, goods need only belong to the same class and not necessarily to the same variety; where the original and reprocessed goods are both of the same broad description, refund cannot be denied merely because the finished products differ in variety.

---