9911796707
TMI Blog1996 (9) TMI 365X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... No. 15 of the Table annexed to Notification No. 68/83-C.E., dated 1-3-1983 as amended by various notifications, the last being Notification No. 69/85-C.E., dated 17-3-1985. The contention of the Revenue was that they were classifiable under S. No. 16 of the Table aforesaid. S. No. 16 covered the Dumpers conforming to the given specifications. The Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Hosur under his order dated 9-12-1985 had held that the goods were correctly classifiable under S. No. 16. Before this order was passed, the appellants had filed a refund claim under their letter dated 26-4-1985 on the ground that while they had paid excise duty under S. No. 16 of the Table referred to above at 12% ad valorem, the applicable rate should have b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessable at 10% Ad valorem BED, 5% SED and CESS as in S. No. 15 of the Notification No. 68/83-C.E., dated 1-3-1983. It appears that the same was approved on 3-7-1985. The assessments were provisional in view of the dispute regarding payment of CESS on motor-vehicles. Earlier the assessee was paying Central Excise duty on the goods in question at the rate as applicable to Dumpers. For the approval given on 3-7-1985, a show cause notice was issued on 12-9-1985 requiring the appellants to show cause as to why the Hippo Dumpers should not be classified as at S. No. 16 of the Table aforesaid and charged to Central Excise duty at 12% ad valorem. The appellants were also required to show cause as to why the differential duty should not be collec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ption of 3-Axled motor vehicles other than articulated vehicles. We find that in view of the specific inclusion of dumpers under a separate Serial No., i.e., Sl.No.16 of the Table mentioned above, the view taken by the lower authorities was correct. 7. The dumpers in common parlance are known as "off-the highway dumpers" and they are particularly suitable for the function of hauling as discussed by the Delhi High Court - in their decision in the case of Hindustan Motors Ltd. v. UOI reported in 1980 (6) E.L.T. 423 (Del.). As the Hippo Dumpers satisfy the specifications under S.No. 16 of the Table, they were correctly assessable to duty at the rate of 12% ad valorem basic. 8. Accordingly we do not find any infirmity in the order o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
