Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2018 (4) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (4) TMI 1315 - AT - Central ExciseClassification of goods - Mahindra Bolero Camper and its variants - appellants informed the jurisdictional Central Excise authorities that they intend to classify the said “Bolero Camper” as motor vehicle for transportation of goods under CETH classification 8704.21.90, w.e.f. 01.07.2008 - Department took the view that the impugned motor vehicle is not primarily meant for carrying loads but for transporting persons and hence would merit classification under CETH 8703 only - whether the goods classifiable under CETH 8704 or under CETH 8703? Held that: - the test laid down in the earlier Tribunal decision in their own case in CCE, Pune-I Vs. Telco Ltd. [2002 (2) TMI 717 - CEGAT, MUMBAI], that a motor vehicle would be classifiable under 8703 or 8704, depending on how the gross vehicle weight in design of the vehicle was distributed and whether the major portion of it was used for transportation of passengers or for transportation of goods, is still the settled yardstick to be applied in such a controversy - On the basis of the details submitted by appellants, the above test when applied to various variants of the impugned vehicle clearly indicate that in these vehicles of the appellant the load carrying capacity is more than passenger capacity. Evidently, these vehicles then cannot be alleged to be vehicles “principally designed for the transport of persons” which is a sine qua non for meriting classification under Tariff heading 87.03. For a motor vehicle to find a fit in Heading 8703, will necessarily have only a single enclosed interior space, have rear windows along two side panels, have sliding, swing out or lift up doors, with windows, on the side panels or in the rear and more importantly, will not have any permanent panel or barrier between the area for the driver and front passengers and the rear area to enable it being used for transport of both persons and goods. Moreover, as per HSN, to find place in 8703, there should be presence of comfort features and interior finish throughout the vehicle interior - the impugned vehicle namely “Mahindra Camper” and its variants by no such imagination can be said to be satisfying these requirements. Hence, even by applying the conditionalties attendant to HSN notes in Heading 8703, we find that the impugned vehicle will not merit classification under 8703. Revenue have made another contention that by common parlance, the vehicle is only known as a “passenger vehicle”. But, other than making such an assertion, no evidence has been brought forth to prove that the impugned vehicle is used predominantly for transport of passengers and not of goods. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
|