9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (12) TMI 132X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ute must be read harmoniously and not in a manner to render one of the provisions redundant - As such, we are of the view that the interpretation placed by the adjudicating Commissioner is valid and the impugned goods namely chassis fitted with cab manufactured by the appellants are classifiable under Heading 87.06 only Penalty - considering the nature of the dispute in this case which relates to classification only, imposition of penalty is not merited in this case - Penalty imposed are set aside Valuation - Assessee have paid duty on a higher value as contended by the learned counsel, the proper course by the appellants would be to apply for refund of excess duty subject to the legal provisions in force -Appeal dismissed - E/10 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the appellants fitting a cab on the chassis results in manufacture of a motor vehicle requiring classification of chassis fitted with a cab as a motor vehicle under Heading 87.04. On a query from the Bench, the appellants confirm that with effect from June 2006 the appellants are paying duty on the impugned goods at the appropriate rate under Heading 87.06. 2.We have heard arguments from both sides which are primarily on the question of application of the appropriate Chapter Note. In addition, the learned counsel appearing for the appellants states that since the dispute relates to classification only, this is a not case which warrants imposition of penalty. He also makes an alternative argument that in case the appeal is not allowed in f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ould be considered as a motor vehicle applying Chapter Note 3 (for the period upto 28.2.2005 and Chapter Note 5 thereafter) as it would not only render Chapter Note 4 (for the earlier period and Chapter Note 3 for the latter period) totally redundant and the scope of Heading 87.06 would be limited and chassis fitted with cab would be excluded therefrom. As such, we are of the view that the interpretation placed by the adjudicating Commissioner is valid and the impugned goods namely chassis fitted with cab manufactured by the appellants are classifiable under Heading 87.06 only. We also note that the Honrable Finance Ministers speech has no relevant to deciding the above question of classification. 4.As regards imposition of penalty, we ag ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
