https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=46371 Spent sulphuric acid was treated as classifiable under Heading 28.07 rather than Heading 38.23 because the classification issue had already been settled by a binding Larger Bench precedent. The Court applied that precedent consistently to the product in question and accepted the Revenue's classification under Heading 28.07. The stated principle is that where tariff classification is governed by binding precedent, the same tariff heading must be applied consistently to the relevant product. en-us Thu, 14 Nov 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 17 Jul 2010 13:42:01 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=46371 Spent sulphuric acid was treated as classifiable under Heading 28.07 rather than Heading 38.23 because the classification issue had already been settled by a binding Larger Bench precedent. The Court applied that precedent consistently to the product in question and accepted the Revenue's classification under Heading 28.07. The stated principle is that where tariff classification is governed by binding precedent, the same tariff heading must be applied consistently to the relevant product. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 14 Nov 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=46371