9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (8) TMI 461X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... icles falling under Chapter 87 of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 and have declared 'Tractors' under Chapter Subheading No.8701.90 in the Classification Declaration w.e.f. 29.6.1998 consequent to their registration. It was opined by the department that the 'Tractors' classified by them in the said Classification Declaration was not a 'Tractor' as defined in the M. V. Act, 1988 or as defined in Chapter Note 2 to the Chapter 87, as these Tractors to be classified are not designed to carry any load (other than equipment used for the purpose of propulsion) as per the definition provided in the M. V. Act, 1988. Hence, a show cause notice C. No.V/87/3/7/98 B5 dated 9.11.98 was issued to the respondent requiring them to sho ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s part of the copy of proceedings which was not given to the respondent is against the principles of natural justice, and since this has not been done by the lower authority, the Commissioner (A) sent back the case to the adjudicating authority with direction that he should give the copy of the relevant document to the respondent and decide the case after granting one more opportunity of personal hearing to the respondent. As per the directions of the Commissioner (Appeals), a personal hearing was fixed and intimated to the respondent along with a copy of the letter dated 1.10.99 addressed to ARAI seeking clarification and letter dated 29.10.99 received from ARAI were also sent to the respondent. After the respondent was heard on 10.8-2001, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... own case by the Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal reported in - 2004 (174) ELT 36. The respondent also relied upon the following decisions in support of their submissions. * Bajaj Auto Ltd Vs. CCE, Pune: 2006 (202) ELT 831 (Tri.-Mum.) * CCE, Pune Vs. Bajaj Auto Ltd.: 2015 (325) ELT 465 (SC) * Tata Motors Ltd. Vs. CCE, Jamshedpur: 2010 (256) ELT 145 (Tri.-Kolkata) 5. After considering the submissions of both the parties and perusal of the material on record, we find that the issue is squarely covered in favour of the assessee in the assessee's own case decided by the Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal cited supra. Further, in the case of Bajaj Auto Ltd Vs. CCE cited supra, the Tribunal held that said goods are classifiable under Heading 8701 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
