Binding Tribunal rulings must guide adjudication, while show cause notices may still proceed to preserve further challenge rights.

Subordinate adjudicating authorities must follow a binding Tribunal decision on education cess and secondary and higher education cess unless it is stayed or reversed, and judicial discipline requires disposal of pending matters in accordance with that view. The High Court held, however, that the department may still issue and pursue show cause notices to keep the controversy alive for challenge in appropriate proceedings. Accordingly, the notices were not interdicted, but the adjudicating authority was directed to decide them expeditiously in light of the Tribunal ruling and the Court's observations.

---

---

Issues: Whether the impugned show cause notices demanding education cess and secondary and higher education cess could be interdicted on the ground that the issue had already been decided in favour of the assessee by the Tribunal and whether the adjudicating authority was bound to follow that view while still being permitted to proceed by notice.

Analysis: The Tribunal's decision was held to be binding on the adjudicating authority, and judicial discipline required subordinate revenue authorities to follow the appellate view so long as it was not stayed or reversed. At the same time, the Court accepted the department's position that it could still keep the issue alive for further challenge in appropriate proceedings. For that limited purpose, issuance of show cause notices was not treated as unlawful, but the adjudicating authority had to decide them in accordance with the Tribunal's ruling and the Court's observations.

Conclusion: The challenge to the show cause notices was not accepted. The adjudicating authority was directed to adjudicate the notices expeditiously and in light of the binding Tribunal decision, leaving the department free to pursue further remedies in appropriate proceedings.

Ratio Decidendi: A subordinate adjudicating authority must follow the binding decision of the higher appellate tribunal, but the department may issue and pursue proceedings to preserve its right to challenge that view in the appropriate higher forum.

---