Countervailing duty on imported alkylated phenol failed where the Tribunal followed its earlier ruling on identical facts.

Countervailing duty on imported alkylated phenol under Item 65 of the Central Excise Tariff was challenged on the basis that the facts were identical to an earlier appeal already decided by the Tribunal. As the Revenue could not distinguish the prior ruling, the Tribunal applied the same factual and legal matrix and treated the present demand on the same footing. The demand was therefore not sustained, and consequential relief followed for the assessee.

---

---

Issues: Whether countervailing duty was leviable on the imported consignments of alkylated phenol and whether the appeal should be allowed on the same reasoning as the earlier decided matter concerning an identical consignment.

Analysis: The dispute arose from demand of countervailing duty under Item 65 of the Central Excise Tariff on imported alkylated phenol. The facts were stated to be identical to those in the earlier appeal already decided by the Tribunal, and the Revenue was unable to distinguish that earlier decision. The Tribunal followed its prior ruling on the same factual and legal matrix.

Conclusion: The demand could not be sustained on the same footing as the earlier matter, and the appeal was accepted with consequential relief to the assessee.

---