ORDER : Ashok Bhan, H.S. Bedi and V.S. Sirpurkar, JJ. :- Before the Tribunal, the following two points were raised by the assessee-respondent. " 1. Whether the price at which the respondent sold the product should be treated as cum duty price and therefore the excise duty should be deducted from the price for arriving at the assessable value. 2. Whether affixation of brand name of a foreign company but otherwise registered in the name of the Indian company would disentitle the Indian company namely the assessee to the benefit of exemption under SSI notification 1/93." 2. On the first point, the case has been remanded back to the Commissioner for re-quantification against which the revenue has no grievance. The findings recorded by the Tribunal on point No.1 is, therefore, affirmed. 3. Point No.2 has been decided by the Tribunal against the revenue relying upon a judgment of the Single Bench of the Calcutta High Court in the case of ESBI Transmission Pvt. Ltd. v. CCE, 1997 (91) ELT 47 (Cal.) which was upheld by a Division Bench of that Court in CCE v. ESBI Transmission Pvt. Ltd., 1997 (91) ELT 292 (Cal). 4. Admittedly, against the judgment of the Calcutta High Court the revenue did not file any appeal. The same has become final. 5. Since, the revenue did not challenge the judgment of the Calcutta High Court in the afore-mentioned case, the revenue cannot be permitted to re-agitate the point which is concluded by the afore- mentioned judgment of the Calcutta High Court in the present appeal. This apart, it has been pointed out by the counsel appearing for the respondent which is not controverted by the counsel for the revenue that the point also stands concluded by a judgment of this Court in Commissioner of Central Excise, Goa v. Primella Sanitary Products, 2005 (184) ELT 125 (SC). In view of this, we find no merit in this appeal and dismiss the same leaving the parties to bear their own costs. .Appeal dismissed.