1999 (8) TMI 237

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Member (T)]. The issue involved in these two appeals arising out of common order dated 29-3-1993 is regarding demand of duty on Gharghanties which were classified by the Department under 85.09 as against 84.37 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act claimed by the Department. 2. Shri K.A. Sindhi, learned Consultant submitted that the Central Board of Excise Customs vide Circular .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nce the goods manufactured by them are classifiable under 84.37, the question of paying any differential duty does not arise. The learned Consultant has given up his arguments on time limit in respect of the demands confirmed in the impugned order. 3. Shri A.K. Jain, learned DR submitted that the classification issue had earlier come before the Appellate Tribunal in the case of appellants themse .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... reme Court vide order dated 6-3-1995. As the matter regarding classification has been finally decided by the Tribunal and appeal against which has been dismissed the goods remained classified under Heading 85.09. Board by issuing a circular cannot change the decision given by the Tribunal. This Bench is not sitting in judgment over the decision given by a concurrent Bench and more so when the appe .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X