Per incuriam precedent is not binding in fiscal adjudication, even when it is a Larger Bench ruling.

An adjudicating authority in fiscal matters is not bound to follow a Larger Bench decision that is ex facie per incuriam. A precedent rendered sub silentio lacks binding force, so its status as a Larger Bench ruling does not require obedience if it is legally defective. The discussion also noted reliance on Rule 57F(3) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 and a High Court decision, but held that those points did not need further examination because the reference issue was already settled by unanimous authority.

---

---

Issues: Whether an adjudicating authority in fiscal matters is bound by a Larger Bench decision even if that decision is ex facie per incuriam.

Analysis: The answer to the reference was stated to be negative. A decision rendered sub silentio is not binding, and therefore a precedent that is shown to be per incuriam does not command obedience merely because it is a Larger Bench ruling. The order also noted the appellant's reliance on Rule 57F(3) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 and on a High Court decision, but found that those contentions did not require further examination for the disposal of the application, as the legal position on the reference question was already settled by unanimous authority.

Conclusion: The adjudicating authority is not bound to follow a Larger Bench decision that is ex facie per incuriam.

---