Tariff classification of sintered steel and copper products governed the dispute, and earlier Tribunal acceptance defeated the duty demand.

The Tribunal treated the tariff classification issue as already settled in earlier proceedings, where the assessee's classification of sintered steel and copper products under sub-heading 7308.90 and 7413.90 had been accepted. On that basis, the departmental view classifying the goods under sub-heading 84.83 could not be sustained, because the duty demands depended on a classification position that had already been displaced by the earlier Tribunal ruling. The duty demands were therefore set aside and the appeals succeeded.

---

---

Issues: Whether the duty demands based on classification of sintered products of steel and copper under chapter sub-heading 84.83 were sustainable when the assessee's proposed classification under chapter sub-heading 7308.90 and 7413.90 had been accepted in earlier Tribunal proceedings.

Analysis: The classification controversy had already been settled by the Tribunal in earlier appeals, where the assessee's classification of sintered products of steel and copper under the respective tariff sub-headings was accepted. In view of that binding classification position, the duty demands founded on the departmental classification under chapter sub-heading 84.83 could not survive.

Conclusion: The duty demands were liable to be set aside and the appeals succeeded.

---