Finality of remand orders bars reopening concluded Cenvat credit proceedings despite later change in law.

An order that has attained finality and was not challenged by the Revenue must be followed in remand proceedings, and the lower authority cannot reopen the matter on the basis of a later change in law. Here, the Tribunal's remand had directed verification of actual utilisation of excess Cenvat credit, and departmental acceptance had concluded the proceedings. The Assistant Commissioner was therefore bound by the remand directions and could not confirm interest and penalty merely because the Supreme Court later reversed the earlier High Court view in Ind-Swift Laboratories. A later circular also could not be applied retrospectively to disturb the concluded matter.

---

---

Issues: Whether the adjudicating authority could reopen remand proceedings and confirm interest and penalty on excess Cenvat credit after the Tribunal's remand order had attained finality and had not been challenged by the Revenue, despite the subsequent reversal of the High Court view by the Supreme Court.

Analysis: The Tribunal's earlier remand had directed verification of whether the excess Cenvat credit had actually been utilized and had proceeded on the legal position then prevailing. That order was not challenged by the Revenue and was accepted in departmental proceedings, leading to refund of the pre-deposit and conclusion of the remand proceedings. Once the Tribunal's order had attained finality, the Assistant Commissioner was bound by it and could not ignore the remand directions merely because the Supreme Court later reversed the High Court decision in Ind-Swift Laboratories. The later departmental circular was also not given retrospective effect to disturb a concluded matter.

Conclusion: The reopening of the remand proceedings and the fresh confirmation of interest and penalty were not sustainable.

Final Conclusion: The impugned order of the Commissioner (Appeals) was upheld and the Revenue's appeal failed because a concluded appellate order could not be displaced by a subsequent change in law when it had not been challenged and had already attained finality.

Ratio Decidendi: An order that has attained finality and has not been challenged must be followed by the lower authority, and a subsequent declaration of law cannot be used to reopen or disregard concluded proceedings.

---