Excise classification of narrow products as bars, not flats, sustained where tariff guidance and trade notices governed the distinction.

Products with a width of less than 5 inches were treated as bars for central excise classification because the governing tariff guidance, circulars and trade notices indicated that such goods fell within the bar category. The revisional authority's reliance on the assessee's market description alone was unsustainable where the specific classification instructions had not been properly considered. On that basis, the Delhi High Court held the goods to be bars and not flats, set aside the revisional order, and recognised the petitioner's entitlement to consequential relief, including refund.

---

---

Issues: Whether the petitioner's products were correctly classifiable as "bars" rather than "flats" for central excise duty purposes, and whether the petitioner was entitled to consequential refund relief.

Analysis: The classification had to be determined in accordance with the existing tariff guidance, circulars and trade notices governing the distinction between bars and flats. The products were of a width less than 5 inches, and the contemporaneous instructions indicated that such goods were to be treated as bars. The earlier appellate order had also accepted that the adjudicating authority had not dealt with the specific classification instructions and that the petitioner's goods were correctly classifiable as bars. The revisional order rejecting that position solely on the basis of the assessee's market description was therefore not sustainable.

Conclusion: The petitioner's products were held to be bars and not flats, and the revisional order was set aside. The petitioner was held entitled to consequential relief, including refund.

---