2013 (8) TMI 684 - AT - Central Excise

Benefit of Notification No. 6/02-CE - Refund of duty paid at the time of clearance of the motor vehicle - Authorities denied the refund claim - Held that - extended period of three months, as mentioned in the notification, is for registration of the vehicle and not merely for submission of the registration certificate - Following decision of Tata Motors Ltd. vs. CCE, Lucknow 2011 (5) TMI 233 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI - Decided in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues:
Interpretation of Notification No. 6/02-CE dated 1/3/02 regarding refund of duty on motor vehicles registered as taxis within a specified period.

Analysis:

1. Interpretation of Notification No. 6/02-CE:
The main issue in this case revolves around the interpretation of Notification No. 6/02-CE dated 1/3/02, specifically concerning the eligibility for a refund of duty paid at the time of clearance of a motor vehicle if the vehicle is subsequently registered as a taxi within a specified period. The notification allows for a three-month period for registration as a taxi, with a provision for an extended period of three months. The dispute arose as the vehicle in question was registered within six months, leading to the denial of the refund claim by the lower authorities.

2. Judicial Precedent and Interpretation:
The Tribunal referred to a previous decision in Tata Motors Ltd. vs. CCE, Lucknow (2012) where it was established that the extended period of three months mentioned in the notification is intended for the registration of the vehicle itself, not just for the submission of the registration certificate. Building upon this precedent, the Tribunal held that the vehicle being registered within six months aligns with the interpretation provided in the Tata Motors case. Consequently, the impugned order denying the refund claim was set aside, and the appeal was allowed in favor of the appellant.

3. Decision and Relief Granted:
Based on the interpretation of the notification and the application of the precedent set in the Tata Motors case, the Tribunal concluded that the extended period allowed for registration of the vehicle applies to the present situation where the vehicle was registered within six months. As a result, the appellant was granted consequential relief, overturning the lower authorities' decision to deny the refund claim. The judgment, as pronounced in open court, signifies the importance of consistent interpretation and application of legal provisions in tax-related matters to ensure fairness and adherence to established principles.

This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the key issues, the legal interpretation applied, the relevant judicial precedent, and the final decision rendered by the Tribunal in favor of the appellant.