Central Excise tariff classification follows binding precedent for identical rubber blankets, confirming Heading 40.16.

Rubber blankets under the Central Excise Tariff were held classifiable under Heading 40.16, not Heading 40.08, because an earlier binding Tribunal decision had already classified identical goods under Heading 40.16. The Tribunal followed that prior view, found no distinguishing facts, and rejected the contrary classification adopted in the impugned order. The classification order was set aside and the Revenue's appeal succeeded on the tariff issue.

---

---

Issues: Classification of rubber blankets under the Central Excise Tariff.

Analysis: The dispute concerned whether rubber blankets were classifiable under Heading 40.08 or Heading 40.16 of the Central Excise Tariff. The impugned order had followed an earlier order-in-appeal, but that earlier view had already been reversed by the Tribunal in a prior final order, which held the same goods classifiable under Heading 40.16. Following that binding view, the Tribunal held that the correct classification of the goods was under Heading 40.16.

Conclusion: The classification under Heading 40.08 was rejected and the goods were held classifiable under Heading 40.16, in favour of the Revenue.

Final Conclusion: The impugned classification order was set aside and the Revenue's appeal succeeded on the tariff classification issue.

Ratio Decidendi: Where an earlier binding decision has classified identical goods under a specific tariff heading, that classification should be followed for subsequently identical disputes absent distinguishing facts.

---