Full Judgment
2. The respondents are engaged in the manufacture of yarn on hollow spindles consisting of wool, animal hair and man-made fibres. The core of the yarn primarily consists of polyester filament yarn/man-made yarn. The yarn so manufactured is subjected by them to the process of raising on the raising machines.
3. The issue involved in the present appeals relates to the classification of the above said yarn. According to the Department, the yarn is classifiable under Chapter Sub-heading 5606.00 of the CETA, while the stand taken up by the respondents is that it is classifiable under Chapter 5107 of the CETA. The adjudicating authority confirmed the duty demand by holding classification under 5606 of the CETA, by denying the benefit of Notification 1/93 dated 28.2.1993. The Commissioner (Appeals) had reversed that order by following the earlier order-in-appeal No. 279/CE/CHD-1/02 dated 26.7.2002 passed in the respondents' own case.
4. The learned SDR has contended that the earlier order-in-appeal in favour of the respondents in regard to the classification could not be followed and as such, the impugned order deserves to be set aside. On the other hand, the learned Counsel has reiterated the correctness of the impugned order 5. We have heard both sides. From the record, we find that in respect of this very yarn manufactured by the respondents, the dispute regarding classification earlier also arose and was decided in favour of the respondents vide order dated 26.7.2002 which has been relied upon by the Commissioner (Appeals) in the impugned order. There is nothing on record to suggest if that order was ever challenged by the Department. That being so the said earlier order having attained the finality, is binding on the Department.Even for the subsequent period, by following the above said earlier order of the Commissioner (Appeals), the Assistant Commissioner had dropped the duty demand against the respondents. A copy of that order had been placed on record by the Counsel for the respondents. Therefore, the plea of the Revenue that the earlier said order of the Commissioner (Appeals) regarding classification of the yarn in question manufactured by the respondents, could not be accepted and relied upon for passing the impugned order, is devoid of any legal force. The said earlier order is binding on the Department and the Department is debarred legally from reagitating the classification issue till that order holds the field. The learned Commissioner (appeals) has rightly, relied upon that order and reversed the Order-in-original of the adjudicating authority. We do not find any illegality in the impugned orders of the Commissioner (Appeals) and the same are upheld. Consequently all the above captioned appeals are dismissed being without merit.