https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115552 A de novo adjudication must remain within the scope of the remand, and a later departmental circular cannot be used retrospectively to alter classification when the remand was limited to the application of an earlier circular. Here, once the imported goods were found physically similar to those covered by the earlier circular, reliance on the later circular to reclassify them under Heading 9404.29 and sustain differential duty went beyond the remand mandate. Because the later circular stated that the revised classification would apply only prospectively, earlier bills of entry could not be disturbed to the importer's detriment. The classification and duty demand were therefore set aside. en-us Fri, 17 Jun 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 30 May 2012 18:22:35 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115552 A de novo adjudication must remain within the scope of the remand, and a later departmental circular cannot be used retrospectively to alter classification when the remand was limited to the application of an earlier circular. Here, once the imported goods were found physically similar to those covered by the earlier circular, reliance on the later circular to reclassify them under Heading 9404.29 and sustain differential duty went beyond the remand mandate. Because the later circular stated that the revised classification would apply only prospectively, earlier bills of entry could not be disturbed to the importer's detriment. The classification and duty demand were therefore set aside. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 17 Jun 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115552