9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Eligibility of truck mounted crane for exemption under entry 22 of Notification 61/99. Analysis: The appeal before the Appellate Tribunal CEGAT, Mumbai concerned the eligibility of a truck mounted crane for exemption under entry 22 of Notification 61/99. The entry exempts goods classifiable under Heading 84.26, excluding those falling under sub-heading 41. The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the Assistant Commissioner's decision that the goods were classifiable under sub-heading 41, hence not entitled to the exemption. The appellant failed to appear or be represented despite notice. The Tribunal reviewed the memorandum of appeal, submissions, and heard the departmental representative. The relevant entry 84.26 and its sub-headings were examined, specifically sub-heading 41 for machinery designed for mounting on road vehicles. The appellant initially claimed classification under sub-heading 19 as "Other," but later argued for classification under sub-heading 12 or sub-heading 99. Sub-heading 99 was excluded as it applies to goods not covered by preceding headings, including self-propelled machinery. Sub-heading 12 pertains to mobile lifting frames on tyres and straddle carriers, which the appellant's goods did not align with based on literature and evidence presented. The Tribunal referenced previous decisions in TTG Industries Ltd. v. CC and Aban Loyd Chiles Offshore Ltd. v. CCE to support their analysis. However, it was concluded that the appellant's goods did not fit the descriptions of mobile lifting frames or straddle carriers as per the Harmonised System of Nomenclature and the evidence provided. The Tribunal found that the literature and evidence did not support the appellant's claim for classification under the sub-headings they proposed. The certificate of the chartered engineer, a key piece of evidence, was not adequately addressed in the appeal. Consequently, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal, stating that there were insufficient grounds for interference based on the information presented. In conclusion, the Appellate Tribunal CEGAT, Mumbai dismissed the appeal regarding the classification and eligibility of the truck mounted crane for exemption under entry 22 of Notification 61/99, as the evidence and arguments provided by the appellant did not support their claim for a different classification under the relevant sub-headings of Heading 84.26.
|
