9911796707
TMI Blog2002 (9) TMI 644X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rmed by the Commissioner (Appeals) and whether extended period of limitation for demanding Central Excise duty is invocable. 2. Shri Naveen Mullick, learned Advocate, submitted that BMDS is an equipment to mix more than two chemical ingredients which on mixture becomes explosive; that chasis mounted BMDS is then driven to the coal field site near the blasting hole and the prepared mixture is transferred into the blasting hole and BMDS is driven away; that it is thus apparent that the main function of the impugned equipment is to prepare a hazardous and highly explosive mixture and transferring the same into a blasting hole; that a BMDS can very well function without having mounted on a chasis; that it is clear from show cause notice that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... stem (BMDS) under Heading 84.79; that they had also filed a classification declaration on 3-8-95 in which one of the item declared was BMDS under Sub-heading 8479.10; that as they were availing of Modvat credit of the duty paid on inputs under Rule 57A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, they had filed a Modvat declaration under Rule 57G on 9-5-96 which clearly declared motor vehicle chasis of Sub-heading 8706.40 as an input for manufacture of BMDS of Sub-heading 8479.10; that the Classification declaration read with Modvat declaration clearly reveals that the BMDS is manufactured using motor vehicle chasis and as such there was no suppression of facts on their part. He, further, mentioned that they were filing R.T. 12 Returns along with the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ra 12) that the Classification Declaration had been accepted. He, therefore, contended that as such there was no suppression of facts. He relied upon the following decisions :- (i) CCE v. Chemphor Drugs Liniments - 1989 (40) E.L.T. 276 (S.C.), (ii) Padmini Products v. CCE - 1989 (43) E.L.T. 195 (S.C.). 4. Finally the learned Advocate submitted that Notification No. 162/86-C.E., dated 1-3-86 exempted Special Purpose Motor Vehicles from payment of duty, if manufactured from chasis and equipments on which the duty of excise leviable had already been paid; that the Appellants had received the chasis on payment of duty and Modvat credit had been availed; that they cleared the BMDS on payment of duty under Heading 84.79 towards t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... arned SDR, further, submitted that the extended period of limitation is invocable; that in their classification declaration or in their letter dated 21-8-95 the Appellants did not mention chasis as one of the inputs; that they had also not mentioned in the process of manufacture about the mounting process; that they had deliberately suppressed the fact regarding the nature and description of BMDS, and therefore, acceptance of classification declaration and assessment of RT-12 return do not advance the case of the appellants, as far as invocation of extended period of limitation is concerned; that filing of Modvat declaration subsequently is of no consequence as it does not amend the classification declaration on the basis of which the produ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on. It is, thus, apparent from the process of manufacture that the appellants are making special purpose vehicles for mixing of various chemicals and taking the mixture to the blasting site and feeding the mixture into the blasting hole. It is mentioned in the Explanatory Note of HSN below Heading 87.05 that This Heading covers a range of motor vehicles specially constructed or adapted, equipped with various devices that enable them to perform certain non-transport functions, i.e. the primary purpose of the vehicles of this Heading is not to transport the persons or goods. Number of special purpose motor vehicles has been mentioned in the Explanatory Notes such as outside Broadcast vans, Mobile Clinic with operation theatre, anesthetic eq ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for availing Credit of duty-paid on motor vehicle chasis was filed by them on 9-5-96. It has been clearly mentioned in the Modvat declaration that the inputs are motor vehicle chasis and the final product is Bulk Mix Delivery System. From this declaration it is apparent that the Appellants had clearly declared to the department that motor vehicle chasis is used as an input in the manufacture of BMDS. With such a declaration it cannot be claimed by the department that the Appellants have suppressed any vital fact from the department with an intent to evade payment of duty. Chasis as an input can be used only for the purpose of mounting certain equipments, apparatus, etc., on it. Moreover the Modvat credit is available to any manufacturer on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
