DEBANGSU BASAK,J. - (1.) The petitioner has assailed an Order bearing No. 12/08 dated December 16, 2008 passed on revision under Section 35EE of the Central Excise Act, 1944.
(2.) Learned Senior Advocate for the petitioner has submitted that, the revisional authority had failed to appreciate that, the revisional authority in an earlier consignment has negated the contentions of the Commissioner of Central Excise as sought to be upheld in the impugned order. He has submitted that, the identity of the goods exported stands established. He has also submitted that, identical issues raised by the Commissioner of Central Excise were dealt with in respect of the earlier consignment by the revisional authority, against the department. That being the position, the impugned order ought to be set aside.
(3.) Learned Advocate for the department has submitted that, the petitioner is not entitled to the claim negative equality. The earlier decision of the revisional authority cannot be taken advantage of by the petitioner. Consequently, the revisional authority is correct in passing the impugned order. I have considered the rival contentions of the parties and the materials made available on record.;