2023 (4) TMI 918 - HC - Central Excise

Process amounting to manufacture - labelling or relabelling the parts components and assembly of Hydraulic Excavators Dozer Wheel Loaders Motor Graders Tippers and Dumpers - earth moving equipment like Hydraulic Excavators Dozer Wheel Loaders Motor Graders Tippers and Dumpers are automobiles or not - Whether provisions of section 2(f)(ii) are applicable to unpacked parts and components of earth moving equipment like Hydraulic Excavators Dozer Wheel Loaders Motor Graders Dumpers and Tippers? HELD THAT - When the appeal came up on board on 27 February 2023 the same was adjourned at the request of learned counsel for the Respondent as a praecipe was filed by the Appellant for remand of the proceedings to the Tribunal in the light of order of the Hon ble Supreme Court in JCB INDIA LTD VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE PUNE-I 2023 (2) TMI 1130 - SUPREME COURT . Thereafter on 30 March 2023 order came to be passed. In view of this position and the fact that the impugned judgment and order is based almost entirely on the decision in the case of JCB India Limited which is being considered by the larger bench of the Tribunal it is opined that the impugned judgment and order needs to be quashed and set aside and the appeal filed by the Appellant bearing Appeal No. E/86741 of 2013 stands restored to the file of the Tribunal - the questions of law framed are answered accordingly. Appeal disposed off.

Summary

Issues Involved:
The appeal involves substantial questions of law regarding the classification of earth moving equipment as automobiles, the applicability of certain provisions of the Central Excise Act to imported parts, the labeling of parts by the appellant, and the application of provisions to unpacked parts of earth moving equipment.

Classification of Earth Moving Equipment:
The appeal challenges the decision of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal regarding the classification of earth moving equipment like Hydraulic Excavators, Dozer, Wheel Loaders, Motor Graders, Tippers, and Dumpers as automobiles. The Tribunal relied on its own decision in a previous case and considered these equipment as automobiles. However, the Supreme Court observed a conflict between different benches of the Tribunal and remanded the matter for consideration by a larger bench. Consequently, the impugned judgment and order were set aside, and the appeal was restored to the Tribunal for further proceedings before the larger bench.

Applicability of Central Excise Act Provisions:
The issue before the Tribunal was whether certain activities undertaken by the appellant amount to manufacture within Section 2(f)(ii) of the Central Excise Act, 1944, and whether the parts of earth moving/construction vehicles are covered under specific sections for valuation purposes. The appellant pointed out that the Tribunal based its decision on a case subject to challenge in the Supreme Court, leading to the remand of the matter for consideration by a larger bench. Consequently, the impugned judgment and order were quashed, and the appeal was restored to the Tribunal for further proceedings before the larger bench.

Labeling of Parts and Components:
The Tribunal's decision regarding the appellant labeling or relabeling parts, components, and assemblies of earth moving equipment was challenged. However, due to the conflict between different Tribunal benches and the remand order by the Supreme Court for consideration by a larger bench, the impugned judgment and order were set aside, and the appeal was restored to the Tribunal for proceedings before the larger bench.

Applicability to Unpacked Parts:
The appellant contested the applicability of provisions to unpacked parts and components of earth moving equipment. The Supreme Court's remand order for consideration by a larger bench led to setting aside the impugned judgment and order. The appeal was restored to the Tribunal for further proceedings before the larger bench, allowing the appellant to address the legal issues before the larger bench.

In conclusion, due to the conflict between Tribunal benches and the remand order by the Supreme Court for consideration by a larger bench, the impugned judgment and order were quashed, and the appeal was restored to the Tribunal for proceedings before the larger bench, providing an opportunity for the appellant to address the legal issues involved.