Exemption notification claims survive a limited remand, but procedural compliance remains essential to secure the benefit.

A remand limited to classification does not, by itself, bar an assessee from claiming exemption notifications if the benefit is otherwise available. The decisive question remains whether the assessee can establish eligibility and compliance with the procedural conditions attached to the notifications. Here, the claim failed because the adjudicating authority independently examined the notifications and found that the assessee had not demonstrated the required procedural adherence. The legal position on the scope of the remand was accepted, but the exemption claim was rejected on merits for non-compliance with the notification requirements.

---

---

Issues: Whether a remand limited to classification of goods barred the assessee from claiming the benefit of exemption notifications, and whether the assessee had established compliance with the procedural requirements for availing such notifications.

Analysis: A remand for a particular purpose does not, by itself, curtail the assessee's right to seek exemption if otherwise available under the notifications. However, the claim was not sustainable on the record because the adjudicating authority had independently examined the notifications and found that the assessee had not shown compliance with the procedures required to avail the benefit. The rejection of the claim was thus based on failure to establish eligibility and procedural adherence.

Conclusion: The legal position that the remand did not prevent the assessee from claiming the notifications was accepted, but the assessee failed on merits, and the appeal was rejected.

---