ORDER
S.L. Peeran, Member (J)
1. The Revenue is seeking stay of the operation of Order-in-Appeal 21/2003 (H-II) Cus., dated 7-10-2003. The Commissioner (Appeals) has held that the imported item ‘Printer Mechanism’ is eligible for the benefit of exemption under Notification 17/2001-Cus. The Revenue’s contentions is that the item is not eligible for the benefit of the Notification and rely on several judgments of the Apex Court and Tribunal. It is their contention that notification clearly stipulates that exemption is not available to any assembly which include any one or more of the following items namely :
(i) Populated Printed Circuit Boards (PPCBs)
(ii) Motherboards (with or without CPU)
(iii) Power Supply Unitp
It states that ‘Printer Mechanism’ contain assemblies of various parts. Therefore the benefit of the Notification cannot be widened. Heard learned SDR and learned Consultant in the matter. It is brought to our notice that the Revenue had filed another application C/Stay/192/2003 in Appeal No. C/285/2003 and the Tribunal after due consideration did not grant stay of the operation of the Order of the Commissioner (Appeals) granting benefit of the Notification on the
same item. The stay application was rejected by Stay Order No. 123/2004, dated
3-2-2004.
2. On a careful consideration we notice that the Tribunal in the Stay Order No. 123/2004, dated 3-2-2004 has already expressed their opinion that the issue is an arguable one and in that view has rejected the Revenue’s stay application. We are bound by the earlier order and therefore the stay application is rejected. The present appeal is required to be linked with Appeal No. C/285/2003 and another parties appeal on the same issue in C/47/2004. All the three appeals to come up for hearing in their turn.