Judgment :- 1. This Writ Petition is filed for a direction to the respondents to assess Bill of Entry No.9328440 dated 15.02.2013 filed by the petitioner by allowing exemption from Additional Duty of Customs (CVD) under Notification No.30/2004-CE dated 09.07.2004 as per Final Order Nos.941, 942 and 1109 of 2008 dated August 28, 2008 and September 29, 2008 and allow clearance of the subject goods in this Writ Petition as per the provisions of the Customs Act, 1962. 2. According to the petitioner, it is a firm engaged in the business of import and trading of silk yarn and silk fabrics. The petitioner firm imports 100% Woven Silk Fabrics Not Dyed and Printed Article Nos.12101 CDC 58 GMS per metre width 114 Cms 9047.80 metres and Article No.11160 HABOTAI 56 Gms per metre width 114 cms 5022.50 metres and filed Bill of Entry No.9328440 dated 15.02.2013. The petitioner claimed exemption under Central Excise Notification No.30/2004-CE dated 09.07.2004 as amended from time to time, which exempts goods falling under Central Excise Heading 50 04 00 90 (Silk Yarn) from whole of the Excise Duty. Accordingly, the petitioner claimed exemption for CVD as per Section 3(1) of Customs Tariff Act, 1975. The 2nd respondent did not allow the said exemption on the ground that the exemption is related to only such goods which are manufactured in India, since there is a condition that no CENVAT credit is availed on the inputs. 3. It is the further case of the petitioner that Final Order Nos.941, 942 and 1109 of 2008 dated August 28, 2008 and September 29, 2008, respectively, passed by the CESTAT has categorically ruled that the impugned goods are eligible for the exemption under Notification No.30/04 CE. The petitioner would contend that in the light of the final orders of the CESTAT, the action of the 2nd respondent in not assessing the above Bills of Entry without including CVD and not clearing the goods is an abuse of process of law. Hence, having no other alternative remedy, the petitioner is before this Court. 4. Heard Mr.S.Krishnanandh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.P.Mahadevan, learned Senior Central Government Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents. 5. Hence, having no other alternative remedy, the petitioner is before this Court. 4. Heard Mr.S.Krishnanandh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.P.Mahadevan, learned Senior Central Government Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents. 5. Learned counsel on either side would submit that the relief sought for in this Writ petition is covered by an earlier order of this Court dated 29.09.2010 made in W.P.No.22165 of 2010, which reads as follows: "It is stated that on an earlier occasion while dealing with the same issue, this Court passed an order in W.P.No.2301 of 2010 -[M/s.Shiv Shanti Exim Pvt. Ltd. vs. The Commissioner of Customs] by order dated 15.02.2010 as follows: " ... However, considering the nature and scope of the prayer claimed in the writ petition and also taking note of the fact that the subject matter of goods are lying for a long time, the writ petition stands disposed of with a direction against the respondents to release the subject matter of goods concerned in respect of the above said Bill of Entry subject to the condition that the petitioner furnishing a bank guarantee to the entire value of Additional Duty of Customs (CVD) to the satisfaction of the second respondent, which should be kept alive till adjudication process is completed. It is made clear that as and when the bank guarantee is furnished, the respondents shall forthwith release the goods." 2. Following the same, the writ petition is disposed of and the respondents are directed to release the subject goods concerned in respect of the above said Bill of Entries subject to the condition that the petitioner furnishes bank guarantee to the entire value of Additional Duty of Customs (CVD) to the satisfaction of the second respondent, which should be kept alive till adjudication process is completed. It is made clear that as and when the bank guarantee is furnished, the respondents shall forthwith release the goods. No costs." 6. Following the said order of this Court, this Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to release the subject goods concerned in respect of the above said Bill of Entries subject to the condition that the petitioner furnishes bank guarantee to the entire value of Additional Duty of Customs (CVD) to the satisfaction of the second respondent, which should be kept alive till the adjudication process is completed. It is made clear that as and when the bank guarantee is furnished, the respondents shall forthwith release the goods. No costs.