Temurah 22A

לא נהנין ולא מועלין, ואם עד שלא כיפרו הבעלים ⁠— תרעה עד שתסתאב, ותמכר ויביא בדמיה אחרת, ועושה תמורה ומועלין בה.

Furthermore, one may not derive benefit from any of these sin offerings ab initio, but if one derived benefit from them, after the fact, he is not liable to bring a sin offering for misuse of consecrated items. And if the lost animal was found and discovered to be unfit before the owner achieved atonement for his sin with a different animal, it should graze until it becomes blemished, and then it should be sold. And he must bring another sin offering with the money received from the sale. And this animal renders a non-sacred animal exchanged for it a substitute, and one who derives benefit from this animal is liable for misusing it.

גמ׳ מאי טעמא לא תני להו גבי הדדי? רישא ⁠— פסיקא ליה, וסיפא ⁠— לא פסיקא ליה.

Talmud: Although there are 5 types of sin offerings that are sequestered and left to die, the Mishnah initially states: The offspring of a sin offering, and the substitute for a sin offering, and a sin offering whose owner has died should be sequestered and left to die, and only then mentions the remaining two types, a sin offering that is more than one year old and a sin offering that was lost and then found after the owner achieved atonement through the sacrifice of another animal. The Talmud asks: What is the reason the Mishnah does not teach them all together? The Talmud responds: With regard to those sin offerings taught in the first clause, there is an absolute rule that applies equally in all circumstances. But with regard to the remaining types taught in the latter clause, there is no absolute rule, as these sin offerings are left to die only if the owner has already achieved atonement with another animal.