2006 (8) TMI 189

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... case the impugned orders are set aside, the appeals accepted and the assessee is held to be entitled to the benefit of Notifications in question. In favour of assessee.
Ashok Bhan and Markandey Katju, JJ. [Order]. - The assessee-appellant has filed this appeal against Final Order Nos. 1292-1294/2004, dated 27th July, 2004 passed by the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore (for short "the Tribunal") in Appeal Nos. E/l925/1999, E/14/2001 and E/1060/2003 whereby the Tribunal allowed the appeal filed by the Revenue and set aside the order passed by the Appellate Commissioner and remitted the case back to the appellate authority for redecision in the light of the observations made in the impugned order. 2.The assesse .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the assessee under Notification No. 5/99-C.E. after setting aside the demand. 5.Being aggrieved, the Revenue filed two sets of appeals - one against the order passed by the Commissioner on limitation in the first show cause notice and the second against the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) granting benefit of exemption under Notification No. 5/99-C.E. in the second set of show cause notices. 6.The Tribunal by the impugned order has accepted the Revenue's appeals and set aside the orders passed by the Commissioner in both the sets of appeals and remitted them back to the Commissioner for a fresh decision in the light of the observation made in the order. 7.During the course of arguments before the Tribunal, learned Counsel appea .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 1st March, 2000 has also recorded a finding that the facts in the Sulzer's case are identical to the facts of the present case. A copy of the decision in Sulzer's case was handed over to the Counsel for the Revenue and he fairly conceded that the facts and the point of law in the said case are identical to that of the present case and therefore covered by that decision. 11.This Court in a catena of decisions has held that where the department accepts the principle laid down by the Tribunal in one case and let it become final, then the department is not entitled to raise the same point in other cases. The department cannot pick and choose. [See : The decisions of this Court in Union of India & Others v. Kaumudini Narayan Dalal & Another - .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X