Exemption notification interpretation not binding on lower authorities in later cases; Tribunal view to govern subsequent proceedings.

In proceedings concerning exemption under Notification No. 108/95-C.E., the dispute did not survive for recovery because relief had already been granted on limitation. The surviving issue was whether the Commissioner (Appeals)' interpretation of the notification would bind lower authorities in later identical matters. The CESTAT held that such a finding would not bind in subsequent proceedings, and the lower authorities were to follow the Tribunal's own interpretation of the notification relied on by the assessee.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Commissioner (Appeals)' finding denying exemption under Notification No. 108/95-C.E. could bind the lower authorities in subsequent identical proceedings when no demand survived in the present matter.

Analysis: The dispute did not survive for recovery purposes because the impugned order had already granted relief on limitation. The only surviving question was the effect of the Commissioner (Appeals)' interpretation of the notification in future proceedings. The Tribunal held that, in subsequent cases, the lower authorities would not be bound by that finding and would instead follow the Tribunal's own order on the interpretation issue relied upon by the assessee.

Conclusion: The finding of the Commissioner (Appeals) on exemption was not held to be binding in later proceedings, and the authorities were directed to follow the Tribunal's view on the notification issue.

---