1999 (1) TMI 167 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues: Misdeclaration of goods for duty exemption; Application of extended period under Section 11A; Correct classification of tyres for animal drawn vehicles or autorickshaws.

Paragraph 1: The appellant, a tyre manufacturer, declared pneumatic tyres for animal drawn vehicles or hand carts to claim duty exemption under specific notifications. However, the department later alleged misdeclaration as the tyres were used on autorickshaws, not qualifying for the exemption. The Collector confirmed the duty demand and penalty, leading to this appeal.

Paragraph 2: The appellant argued that the tyres were correctly declared for animal drawn vehicles or hand carts, emphasizing that the term "16 4" referred to old nomenclature, not misdeclaration. J.K. Tyres confirmed the tyres were for wheel barrows, not autorickshaws, limiting speed to 15 km/h. The appellant contended that since the classification list was approved, the extended period should not apply.

Paragraph 3: The Departmental Representative supported the Collector's view, citing the technical advisor's statement that the tyres could be used in autorickshaws, corroborated by two tyre dealers.

Paragraph 4: The significance of the tyre size declared by the appellant was debated. The difference between old and new nomenclature was explained, highlighting the misunderstanding by the department in approving the classification list. It was noted that the department had prior knowledge of the tyre size, weakening the misdeclaration claim.

Paragraph 5: On merit, the Department's case was found lacking. J.K. Tyres clarified that the tyres were for wheel barrows with limited speed, not intended for autorickshaws. The lack of evidence showing the tyres were manufactured or sold for autorickshaws supported the appellant's case, leading to the failure of the charge in the notice.

Paragraph 6: The appeal was allowed, and the impugned order was set aside, granting consequential relief to the appellant.