Tariff classification must rest on evidence of goods' true nature; procedural non-compliance alone cannot change the heading.

Classification under the Central Excise tariff must be based on evidence of the goods' true character, and procedural lapses alone cannot justify reclassifying woollen fabrics. The record indicated that the assessee had earlier enjoyed exemption for shoddy blankets, and no material showed that the goods had ceased to be treated as such during the relevant period. Non-maintenance of operation cards or non-compliance with a Board circular and trade notice, without supporting evidence, was insufficient to sustain the Revenue's classification under the disputed sub-heading.

---

---

Issues: Whether the woollen fabrics were correctly classifiable as shoddy blankets or as other woollen fabrics under sub-heading 5107.10 / 5107.99, and whether the absence of operation cards or compliance with procedural directions justified the Revenue's classification.

Analysis: The appeal turned on the nature of the goods and the evidentiary basis for the classification adopted by the Revenue. The record showed that the appellants had been enjoying exemption for shoddy blankets earlier, and no material was produced to show that after the relevant period the goods ceased to be treated as shoddy blankets. Mere non-maintenance of operation cards or non-compliance with Board's circular and trade notice could not, by itself, establish a different tariff classification. In the absence of evidence showing that the goods were other than shoddy blankets, the classification under the disputed sub-heading was not justified.

Conclusion: The impugned classification was not sustained and the appeal succeeded in favour of the assessee.

Final Conclusion: The Revenue failed to discharge the evidentiary burden necessary to support the altered tariff classification, and the order under appeal was set aside.

Ratio Decidendi: Classification under the Central Excise tariff must rest on evidence of the goods' true character, and procedural non-compliance alone cannot justify a different classification in the absence of supporting material.

---