9911796707
TMI Blog1999 (12) TMI 398X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... : (a) that perusal of the catalogue shows that lifting/handling mechanism was not completely integrated with the chassis and therefore, the said item was not excluded from the scope of sub-heading 87.05 by virtue of HSN Explanatory notes at page 1430. (b) that in this self-propelled machine, one or more of the propeller or control elements are not located in the cab of the crane as per the HSN Explanatory notes. 2. Heard the learned Counsel for the appellants who submits that there is high degree of integration between the lifting system and chassis for the following reasons : (a) The chassis is of unusually long length as well as width against the maximum permitted under the Motor Vehicles Act of this country. (b) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eatures of operating from the chassis cab without which either activity was not possible. 4. The learned Counsel further submitted that the catalogue also showed that the vehicle was not allowed to move even an inch with the boom loaded with the object to be lifted. He further submitted that the capacity of the crane was capable of lifting loads upto 140 M.T. Therefore, explanatory clause of HSN at page 1194 under chapter 84.26 was fully satisfied and which reads as follows : The cranes of this heading do not generally move under load or, if they do, the movement is limited and subsidiary to their main function of lifting The learned Counsel submits that in this case the primary function of the entire unit is to lift as heavy as 1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Wood Craft Industries as reported in 1995 (77) E.L.T. 23 (S.C.) wherein it has been held that this explanatory notes had to be mandatorily considered while deciding such classification issue. (d) Further in case of a conflicting decision between classificability of any product under the Customs Tariff Act, the chapter heading would prevail in terms of the Interpretative Rule 3(c). He also distinguished the two decisions cited by the learned Counsel on facts. They have also not relied on the HSN in its totality. 7. We have carefully considered the submissions and records of the case. We have also carefully perused the entire catalogue as well as the model of the item shown to us by the learned Counsel in the Court. On a perusal there ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ported on the ground before any load can be lifted. As a result, this unit cannot move even an inch when it is under load. In fact the operation manual warns that even if there is minute instability or movement, it can cause accident. (e) The rest of the lifting machine is powered and controlled independent of the chassis. These facts are not disputed. 8. Applying these facts to the Customs Tariff Act, we find as follows : (i) There is substantial integration between design of the chassis and the requirement of lifting machine inasmuch as that the chassis has been designed to securely accommodate the facility of boom to the crane when the chassis is in motion and to provide the controls to place into position the straddles be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... therefore was classifiable under Heading 84.26. The Tribunal had applied the ratio of the earlier decision of the Bombay High Court in the case of Randip Shipping Transport Co. Pvt. Ltd. (supra) wherein it was held that the heading relating to special purpose motor vehicles which was then under 87.07, does not refer to cranes at all but deals with work trucks mechanically propelled. We find that on this count the ratio of this decision would apply to this case inasmuch as that the item is for lifting heavy loads upto 140 M.T. as it is very different from work truck, but instead it is a crane. 9. In view of the aforesaid analysis, we are of the considered opinion that the said item would be classifiable under sub-heading 8426.12 as cran ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
