https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=760459 Where the competent Development Commissioner had permitted DTA sale bunching under the Export-Import Policy 1997-2002, the revenue could not ignore that determination and reopen the clearance issue in Central Excise proceedings on the ground that the goods fell under different H.S. codes or did not meet the six-digit code requirement. The court treated the Commissioner's decision as binding for the clearance question, noting that it had already been considered, including on the department's representation, and found no independent power in section 3(1) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 or rule 100A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 to sit in appeal over that permission. The demand was therefore unsustainable. en-us Mon, 15 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 21 Oct 2024 12:09:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=760459 Where the competent Development Commissioner had permitted DTA sale bunching under the Export-Import Policy 1997-2002, the revenue could not ignore that determination and reopen the clearance issue in Central Excise proceedings on the ground that the goods fell under different H.S. codes or did not meet the six-digit code requirement. The court treated the Commissioner's decision as binding for the clearance question, noting that it had already been considered, including on the department's representation, and found no independent power in section 3(1) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 or rule 100A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 to sit in appeal over that permission. The demand was therefore unsustainable. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 15 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=760459