9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (10) TMI 1136X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aluation but for classification, the original authority is considering only the MTT. This is not legally tenable. Appeal allowed by way of remand. - Excise Appeal No. 448 of 2012 - Final Order No. 54128/2016 - Dated:- 18-10-2016 - Hon ble Justice (Dr.) Satish Chandra, President and Hon ble Shri B. Ravichandran, Member (Technical) Ms. Neelima Tripathi, Advocate for the appellant Shri Yogesh Agarwal, A.R. for the respondent JUDGEMENT Per: B. Ravichandran: The appeal is against the order dated 29.12.2011 of Commissioner, Central Excise, Jaipur I. 2. The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of mobile telescopic towers (MTT), The product was classified under heading 73082019. In January 2010, the officers of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... en eligible for exemption under Notification No.6/2006-CE dated 1.3.2006. It was also submitted that when they received chassis free of cost, the duty on the same has already been paid by the customers. The MTT is fabricated on the chassis. The ownership of the vehicle is all the time vested with the customer. Hence, the question of including value of chassis in the final product by them does not arise. 4. Ld. A.R. for Revenue submitted that the classification and duty payment was done by the appellants themselves. It is not tenable now for the appellants to claim different classification . 5. We have heard both sides and perused the appeal records. We find though the classification was not the subject matter agitated in the show caus ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uct they have adopted different valuation practice which is contrary to the law. Apparently, it is admitted by the original authority that the product cleared has to be considered together, as the chassis plus MTT mounted on the same. Here, it is important to classify the said product in the form it is cleared from the appellants unit. Admittedly, the MTT fabricated by the appellants are not cleared separately. What is considered for valuation and taxation is the whole product namely MTT fabricated on the chassis/trailers of motor vehicle. Hence, before valuation and determining the correct duty liability, the product should be correctly classified. We find that the original authority is in error to hold that Mobile Telescopic Tower cannot ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
