9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (8) TMI 889X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Shri Shekhar Vyas, Advocate for the respondent. ORDER The issue involved in the present appeal of the Revenue is as to whether the appellants' final product is required to be classified as Plant Growth Regulator falling under Tariff Sub-heading 3808.10, as contended by the Revenue or the same is required to be classified as Bio-fertilizer falling under Chapter Sub-heading No. 3808.20 of Central ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... passed by Commissioner (Appeals), which has been followed by the Appellate Authority in the present case. It is not the Revenue's case that the earlier Order-in-Appeal which was in the favour of the said respondent, stands challenged by them and stands reversed by any higher appellate. As per Ld. Advocate appearing for the respondent, the sa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... led merits of the case. The Commissioner (Appeals) in the present impugned order has followed the earlier Order-in-appeal passed by him. Admittedly, the earlier Order-in-Appeal has not been challenged by the Revenue and stands accepted. In such a scenario no infirmity can be found in the present order of the Commissioner (Appeals) wherein he has simplicitor followed the earlier order on the classi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
