Exemption for cold storage compressors upheld where an identical notification had already been finally interpreted in the taxpayer's favour.

Identically worded exemption notifications were construed consistently where refrigeration compressors and gas compressors were used for installation of cold storage or cold room for preservation, storage or transport of marine produce. An earlier unappealed adjudication under Notification No. 19/99-CE had granted the same concessional benefit, and that interpretation had attained finality. On that basis, the Revenue could not take a contrary view under Notification No. 6/2002-CE for the same goods and issue. The benefit was not confined only to agricultural produce, and the exemption was treated as applicable to the present notification as well.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellants were entitled to the benefit of Notification No. 6/2002-CE for refrigeration compressors and gas compressors used for installation of cold storage or cold room for preservation, storage or transport of marine produce, in view of an earlier unappealed order under an identically worded notification.

Analysis: The notification in dispute was held to be identically worded to Notification No. 19/99-CE, under which the appellants had already been granted the same concessional benefit by the adjudicating authority. That earlier order had not been appealed and had therefore attained finality. Since the present dispute involved the same issue and the same type of goods, the Revenue was not permitted to adopt a contrary position and deny the exemption. The interpretation accepted earlier, namely that the benefit for installation of a cold storage or cold room was not confined only to agricultural produce, was applied to the present notification as well.

Conclusion: The appellants were entitled to the exemption benefit, and the denial of Notification No. 6/2002-CE was not sustainable.

---