https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=74493 Micro crystal was classified under Tariff Item 11A, rather than Tariff Item 68, of the erstwhile Central Excise Tariff for additional customs duty. The classification followed an earlier view concerning the same assessee and product, as no new legally material distinction justified departure. The departmental classification was restored and the contrary classification was rejected. The main appeal was filed within the prescribed period; delay in supplementary appeals, filed to meet the Tribunal's multiple-appeal practice, was condoned. The governing principle is that an existing binding classification of the same product should be followed unless displaced by a legally material distinction. en-us Wed, 23 Sep 1987 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 09 Jun 2011 12:14:17 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=74493 Micro crystal was classified under Tariff Item 11A, rather than Tariff Item 68, of the erstwhile Central Excise Tariff for additional customs duty. The classification followed an earlier view concerning the same assessee and product, as no new legally material distinction justified departure. The departmental classification was restored and the contrary classification was rejected. The main appeal was filed within the prescribed period; delay in supplementary appeals, filed to meet the Tribunal's multiple-appeal practice, was condoned. The governing principle is that an existing binding classification of the same product should be followed unless displaced by a legally material distinction. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 23 Sep 1987 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=74493