9911796707
TMI Blog2000 (6) TMI 220X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ter alia, Tempo three wheeler Autorickshaw and chasis therefor, which were classified by them under Sub-headings 8703.00 and 8706.30 respectively and they claimed concessional rate of duty under Notification No. 162/86, dated 1-3-1986; that the classification lists effective from 1-3-1989 and 20-3-1990 were approved by the Assistant Collector allowing the concessional rate of duty; that on an application filed by the Department, Collector (Appeals), under the impugned Order, disallowed the exemption under the Notification holding that as per the Notification S.O. 436 (E) dated 12-6-1989, issued under Section 41(4) of the Motor Vehicles Act, the vehicle in question is not an autorickshaw as it has the seating capacity for six passengers (excluding driver). 3.1. Shri C. S. Lodha, learned Advocate, submitted that the impugned vehicles are manufactured by them since 1977; that after proper scruitny and examination, the proper officer approved the classification list from 1977 onwards as autorickshaw that Chapter IV of the Motor Vehicles Act deals with the subject of Registration of motor vehicles; that sections 39 and 40 of the Motor Vehicles Act (M.V. Act) provides that no person ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tute or a statutory instrument in the absence of any definition in that very document it must be given the same meaning which it receives in ordinary parlance or understood in the sense in which people conversant with the subject matter of the statute or statutory instrument understands it. It is hazardous to interpret a word in accordance with its definition in another statute or statutory instruments and more so when such statute or statutory instrument is not dealing with any cognate subject 3.3. The learned Advocate also placed reliance upon the following decisions- (a) Kaira Dist. Co-op Milk Products Union Ltd. v. U.O.I. - 1989 (41) E.L.T. 186 (Bom.) (b) Union of India v. R.C. Jain Others - A.I.R. 1981 S.C.1951 (c) Bombay Chemical Pvt. Ltd v. C.C.E. - 1990 (49) E.L.T. 431 (Tribunal) (d) Collector of Customs v. Reliance Industries Ltd. 1995 (80) E.L.T. 831 (Tribunal) (e) Agromore Ltd. v. CCE, Banglore - 1987 (28) E.L.T. 409 (Tribunal) (f) U.O.I. v. B.P.C.L. - 1987 (30) E.L.T. 383 (Bom.) (g) Smt. Lila Vati Bai. v. State of Bombay - AIR 1957 SC 521 3.4. The learned Advocate also mentioned that if the definitions are allowed to be importe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ) E.L.T. 371 (S.C.) 5. Shri C.S. Lodha, learned Counsel, mentioned that as per S.O. 436 (E), dated 12-6-1989, issued under Section 41(4) of the Act, Autorickshaw would not cover three wheeled motor vehicles meant for transporting the goods; that, however, the Circular issued by the Government, the exemption under Excise Notification No. 162/86-C.E. is available to (i) delivery-vans, (ii) pick-up vans and (iii) autotrailers, which are not covered by the definition of autorickshaw given in S.O. issued under M.V. Act; that the purpose of the said S.O. was quite different was limited to putting the description of the motor vehicle in Registration Book. He also emphasised that different State Governments have framed different Rules; that the Rajasthan Motor Vehicles Rules, 1990 and The Andhra Pradesh Motor Vehicles Rules, 1990 recognise that autorickshaw of seating capacity of more than three passengers is registered as autorickshaw; that impugned vehicle is registered as autorickshaw in different cities and in support he drew our attention to Registration certificate at PP 521, 529, 524 etc. of the Paper Book; that in trade parlance their vehicle tempo three wheeler Auto Rickshaw i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d. He also relied upon the decision in the case of Panama Chemicals Works v. UOI, 1992 (62) E.L.T. 241 (MP), Kirloskar Oil Engines Ltd. v. UOI, 1995 (77) E.L.T. 479 (S.C.) wherein the Apex Court held that the basis for initiation of proceedings being Indian Standards Booklet published by the Indian Standard Institute, it was not proper for the High Court or for the assessing authorities to ignore it. Finally in this regard, reliance was placed upon the decision in National Sales Corporation v. Collector of Customs, Madras, 1995 (78) E.L.T 653 (S.C.) wherein it was held that in absence of any material, I.S. specifications cannot be ignored. The learned S.D.R., contended that the Collector (Appeals) was, therefore, justified in relying upon the definition of autorickshaw as given in Motor Vehicles Act; that according to S.O. 436E, dated 12-6-199, autorickshaw was to be considered in a specific manner and it is required to be registered; that Rajasthan Motor Vehicle Rules, referred to by the learned Advocate, only provides specifications in respect of autorickshaw and tempo. 7. Referring to some registration certificate, furnished by the Appellants, the learned S.D.R. mentioned that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... particular type of autorickshaw and not for all types of autorickshaw; that the list in the S.O. 436 (T), dated 12-8-1989 is not exhaustive one; that if a genus is used all its species are to be covered and reliance was placed on the decision in Indian Tool Manufactures v. Assistant Collector, 1994 (74) E.L.T. 12 (S.C.) in which it was held that if there is a general heading for the purpose of levy of excise duty, then every variety of goods falling under that general heading will have to be taxed under that heading and the fact that a particular variety is known by a particular name will not take it out of the general heading . He also mentioned that as per Indian Trade Classification, based on Harmonised Commodity Description and Coding System and issued by Ministry of Commerce, Autorickshaw may have I. C. Piston engine of a cylinder capacity exceeding 800 CC and as such their product having I.C. Engine of cylinder capacity of 454 CC cannot be taken out of the category of autorickshaw; that their product is registrable as autorickshaw in Maharashtra and in support of this, the Learned Advocate gave a copy of Circular dated 11-11-1999 issued by Transport Commissioner, Maharashtra ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing of the word 'tempo' in Delhi, Gwalior and Bombay, has come to the conclusion that commercial parlance test of the product cannot be applied and accordingly the various affidavits produced by the Appellants had not been considered by him and by going the definition of autorickshaw in SO 436(E) issued under Section 41(4) of the M.V. Acts, the Collector (Appeals) came to the conclusion that the impugned product, having seating capacity of six persons (excluding driver), cannot be called an 'Autorickshaw' and consequently not eligible for exemption under Notification No. 162/86. We find substantial force in the submissions of the Learned Counsel that the definition given in the SO 436(E), issued in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub-Section (4) of Section 4 of the M.V. Act, cannot be intended to serve as an exhaustive description of autorickshaw connoting the understanding of the vehicle in commercial or common parlance if the definition is applied for interpreting the Excise Notification No. 162/86-CE, three wheeled auto-rickshaws used for the purpose of transporting goods would not be autorickshaw as according to SO 436(E), autorickshaw means a motor vehicle having three whe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that Act alone. 11. The Supreme Court in R.C. Jain's case thus refrained from borrowing upon the definition of "Local Fund" and "Local Authority" from other enactments for the purpose of interpreting the provisions of Payment of Bonus Act, 1965. The Learned SDR has also referred to some decisions to rebut the contention of the appellants that definition in other Act should not be imported to interpret the expression. But we find that in the decision in Kirloskar Engines Oil and National Sales Corporation, reference was made to I.S. specifications which stand on completely different footing. In B.P.L. Pharmaceuticals Ltd., no doubt the Supreme Court has referred to the definition of drugs and costmetics in Drugs and Cosmetics Act for the purpose of considering the character of the product 'selsw (sic) involved therein, the conclusion was arrived "having regard to the preparation, label, literature, character, common and commercial parlance understanding and the earlier decision of the Central Board of Excise Customs. 12. It is well settled that the words used in a Taxing Statute have to be understood in the common parlance or commercial parlance. In M.S. Co. case, Supra, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
