Appellate remand required for fresh classification and exemption review when prior directions were not followed.

Failure to comply with an appellate direction for fresh examination of tariff classification and exemption entitlement justified a de novo remand. The adjudicating authority was required to reconsider the classification of dephenalised oil on the merits within the scope of the show cause notice, but instead proceeded on an inoperative sub-heading and did not undertake the mandated reconsideration. The exemption claim under Notification No. 28/89-C.E. also had to be examined afresh in the same exercise. The matter was therefore remitted for reconsideration of both issues.

---

---

Issues: Whether the matter required remand for fresh consideration of the classification of dephenalised oil and the assessee's eligibility for exemption under Notification No. 28/89-C.E. dated 01-03-1989.

Analysis: The appellate direction required a fresh examination of both classification and exemption, but the adjudicating authority did not comply with that mandate. The order also proceeded on an inoperative sub-heading for the relevant period and did not properly address the classification dispute on the merits within the limits of the show cause notice. As the earlier appellate direction was binding and the lower authority failed to undertake the required reconsideration, a fresh adjudication was necessary. The exemption issue also had to be reconsidered in the same de novo exercise.

Conclusion: The matter was rightly remitted for fresh decision on classification and exemption, and the assessee succeeded on the request for remand.

Final Conclusion: The appeal resulted in a de novo remand requiring reconsideration of both the tariff classification and the exemption claim.

Ratio Decidendi: Where an appellate authority directs fresh examination of specific issues, the adjudicating authority must decide those issues afresh in conformity with that direction, and failure to do so justifies remand.

---