ORDER : 1. The present batch of appeals arise from the judgment and order dated 23.10.2007 passed by the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, West Zonal Bench at Mumbai (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Tribunal’) in Appeal Nos. C/282-283/07 and E/536-537/07, by which the learned Tribunal has allowed the appeals preferred by the respondents herein. 2. We have heard Shri N. Venkatraman, learned Additional Solicitor General of India appearing on behalf of the Department/Revenue and Shri Huzefa Ahmadi, learned Senior Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondents. 3. By the impugned judgment and order, the learned Tribunal has allowed the respondents appeals and held that CDMA-WLL telephones manufactured by M/s Teracom Private Limited are Cellular Phones and hence eligible to the benefit of exemption in terms of serial no. 264 of the table to the Notification No.6/2002-CE dated 1.3.2002, Notification No. 21/2002-Cus dated 1.3.2002 as per serial no. 320 of the Table thereto and Notification No. 21/2005-Cus dated 1.3.2005. The learned Tribunal has set aside two orders in original both dated 23.03.2007 passed by the adjudicating authority, by which the benefit of the aforesaid notifications was denied to the respondents. 4. Shri Huzefa Ahmadi, learned Senior Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondents has submitted that the issue involved in the present group of appeals is squarely covered against the revenue/department in view of the decision of this Court in the case of Tata Teleservices Ltd. v. Commissioner of Customs, reported in (2006) 1 SCC 746 . It is submitted that the question before this Court was whether the telephone LSP 340 imported would be entitled to the benefit of the exemption granted by Notification No. 21/2002-Cus dated 1.3.2002 to cellular telephones classified under Tariff Heading 8525-20-17 of the Customs Tariff Act. It is submitted that in the aforesaid case it is held that telephone LSP 340 imported would be entitled to the benefit of the exemption granted by the aforesaid notification. It is submitted that in the present case the dispute is with respect to whether CDMA-WLL telephones manufactured by M/s Teracom Private Limited are cellular phones and hence eligible to the benefit of the exemption in terms of serial no. 264 of the table to the Notification No.6/2002-CE dated 1.3.2002, Notification No. 21/2002-Cus dated 1.3.2002 as per serial no. 320 of the Table thereto and Notification No. 21/2005-Cus dated 1.3.2005 or not. 264 of the table to the Notification No.6/2002-CE dated 1.3.2002, Notification No. 21/2002-Cus dated 1.3.2002 as per serial no. 320 of the Table thereto and Notification No. 21/2005-Cus dated 1.3.2005 or not. It is submitted that on the same analogy applied to telephone LSP 340 with respect to CDMA-WLL telephones manufactured by M/s Teracom Private Limited can be said to be cellular phones and therefore eligible to the benefit of exemption in terms of the aforesaid notifications. It is submitted that therefore no error has been committed by the learned Tribunal. 5. Shri N. Venkatraman, learned Additional Solicitor General of India, as such, is not in a position to dispute the above and as such has not shown any contrary decision to the decision of this Court in the case of Tata Teleservices Limited (supra). 6. In view of the above and considering the decision of this Court in the case of Tata Teleservices Limited (supra), it cannot be said that the learned Tribunal has committed any error in allowing the appeals preferred by the respondents and holding that the respondents shall be entitled to the benefit of exemption in terms of serial no. 264 of the table to the Notification No.6/2002-CE dated 1.3.2002, Notification No. 21/2002-Cus dated 1.3.2002 as per serial no. 320 of the Table thereto and Notification No. 21/2005-Cus dated 1.3.2005. 7. In view of the above and for the reasons stated above, all these appeals deserve to be dismissed and are accordingly dismissed. However, in the facts and circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to costs.