Binding appellate findings control re-adjudication, preventing reopening of excisability for repaired cops and related duty demands.

A lower authority on re-adjudication remains bound by an unreversed tribunal finding that repairing of cops does not amount to manufacture under Section 2(f) of the Central Excises and Salt Act. The remand did not authorise the Collector to ignore that concluded legal determination or reopen excisability. Accordingly, a duty demand on repaired cops, including on their removal, could not be sustained while the earlier tribunal conclusion remained undisturbed. The operative principle is that a de novo exercise must stay within the scope of the remand and cannot contradict binding appellate findings on the same issue.

---

---

Issues: Whether the finding recorded in the earlier tribunal order that repairing of cops did not amount to manufacture and that no excise duty could be demanded on repaired cops remained binding on the Collector in the re-adjudication, and whether duty could be demanded on their removal.

Analysis: The earlier order had remitted the matter for re-adjudication in the light of its observations and directions, and had expressly recorded a finding that repairing of cops did not amount to manufacture within the meaning of Section 2(f) of the Central Excises and Salt Act. That finding was binding on the lower authority until set aside by a competent superior court. A de novo adjudication did not permit the Collector to ignore the tribunal's concluded finding on the legal character of the process or to reopen the question of excisability. A demand of duty on removal of the repaired cops was likewise unsustainable so long as the earlier tribunal conclusion remained undisturbed.

Conclusion: The issue was answered in favour of the assessee. The Collector was bound by the earlier tribunal finding, and excise duty could not be demanded on repaired cops or on their removal on the premise that the issue remained open.

Final Conclusion: The scope of the remand was clarified as not authorising reconsideration of the excisability of repaired cops, and no further directions were considered necessary.

Ratio Decidendi: A lower authority conducting re-adjudication is bound by an unreversed legal finding of the appellate tribunal on the same matter and cannot reopen the issue of excisability contrary to that finding.

---