Binding precedent controls questions of law, and the assessee succeeded against the Revenue.

Questions of law in the appeal were held to be covered by an earlier binding judgment of the same High Court. Applying that precedent, the Court answered the questions consistently with the prior decision and rejected the Revenue's challenge to the CESTAT order. The legal principle applied is that where the issues raised are already governed by a binding earlier judgment of the same Court, the questions of law must be answered in line with that precedent. The questions were accordingly answered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue.

---

---

Issues: Whether the questions of law arising from the appeal were required to be answered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue.

Analysis: The questions framed in the appeal were stated to be covered by an earlier judgment of the same Court. In view of that binding earlier decision, the Court answered the questions consistently with that precedent and did not accept the Revenue's challenge to the CESTAT's order.

Conclusion: The questions of law were answered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the issues raised in an appeal are covered by an earlier binding judgment of the same Court, the questions of law are to be answered consistently with that precedent.

---