Constructive res judicata barred reopening of final fiscal findings on clubbing clearances and exemption eligibility.

The Department could not reopen a concluded finding that two units were one manufacturing unit for clubbing clearances and denying exemption under Notification No. 140/83. An earlier competent quasi-judicial order had already decided the identical issue in the assessee's favour, and that determination had attained finality. In the absence of fresh facts, a change in the manufacturing process, a modified tariff entry, or a contrary binding judicial pronouncement, the issue was barred from reconsideration by constructive res judicata. The departmental challenge therefore failed, and the impugned order in favour of the assessee was upheld.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Department could reopen the question whether the two units were one manufacturing unit for the purpose of clubbing clearances and denying exemption under Notification No. 140/83.

Analysis: The earlier competent quasi-judicial order had already decided the identical question in favour of the assessee, and that finding had attained finality. In the absence of fresh facts, changed manufacturing process, a modified tariff entry, or a contrary binding judicial pronouncement, the Department could not reopen the concluded issue. The principle applied was that of constructive res judicata and the authority could not approbate and reprobate.

Conclusion: The reopening of the issue was not permissible and the departmental challenge failed.

Final Conclusion: The impugned order in favour of the assessee was upheld and the appeal was dismissed.

Ratio Decidendi: A quasi-judicial determination on an issue that has attained finality cannot be reopened by the Department absent fresh material or a subsequent contrary binding decision; constructive res judicata applies to such concluded fiscal adjudications.

---