Bagasse not subject to central excise duty where no manufacturing activity exists and binding precedent has settled the issue.

Bagasse was treated as an agricultural waste product not exigible to central excise duty in the absence of manufacturing activity. The earlier Division Bench ruling had already settled the issue, so the controversy was no longer res integra and the tribunal's order was found free from illegality or impropriety. As the duty liability question stood concluded by binding precedent, there was no basis to reopen the demand or entertain the objections to assessment.

---

---

Issues: Whether bagasse was exigible to central excise duty and whether the appeals could be reopened when the issue had already been settled by an earlier Division Bench decision.

Analysis: The controversy was treated as no longer res integra because an earlier Division Bench had held that bagasse is an agricultural waste product and that no duty can be imposed on it in the absence of any manufacturing activity. The Court followed that settled position and held that the tribunal's order did not suffer from any illegality or impropriety warranting interference. Since the issue stood concluded by the earlier decision, there was no basis to re-examine the demand or the consequential objections regarding duty liability.

Conclusion: The appeals were not maintainable on merits and the challenge to duty liability on bagasse failed.

---