9911796707
TMI Blog2002 (12) TMI 150X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sified under Chapter 87 of the Central Excise Tariff. Three wheeler driveway chassis manufactured by the appellant are sold to independent buyers who in turn get body fabricated as auto rickshaw or a load carrier or a delivery van. The appellant had been filing classification lists under Rule 173-B from time to time. Till an audit objection was raised in 2000, appellant's claim for classifying the chassis under sub-heading 8706.31 read with 8703.10 was being accepted and goods were cleared on that basis. It is the case of the appellant that they have manufactured only 4 or 5 pieces of three-wheelers as a prototype during the relevant period for the purpose of seeking clearance from the Automobile Research Association of India, Pune (ARAI). ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ellant was for the basic model approved by ARAI for 6 persons. Those who are building body on the above chassis had also to adhere to the sanctioned seating capacity by ARAI in the proposed prototype. It was also pointed out that the additional seat by the side of the driver was for a co-driver in the case of load carrier. ARAI had not granted approval for basic Model Vikram 750-D for 7 seats as per the request in the application. 3. The relevant headings and sub-headings are as follows :- Heading No. Sub-heading No. Description of goods Rate of Duty 87.02 Motor Vehicles principally designed for the transport of more than six persons, excluding the driver. 8702.10 Motor vehicles principally designed for the transport of more than s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 8706.39 For the vehicles of sub-heading No. 8703.90 24% For the vehicles of Heading No. 87.04; 8706.41 For the vehicles of sub-heading No. 8704.10 16% 8706.42 For the vehicles of sub-heading No. 8704.20 16% 8706.49 For the vehicles of sub-heading No. 8704.30 or 8704.90 24% 8706 For the vehicles of sub-heading No. 87.05 16% 4. The dispute in the present case is whether few pieces of three-wheelers manufactured by the appellant would come under 8703.10. The claim for classification of the chassis manufactured by the appellant is also based on the claim mentioned above. According to the appellant, it is manufacturing chassis intended for a three-wheeler motor vehicle designed for the transport of not more than six persons exc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and Training Institute, Budni (M.P.), or the Indian Institute of Petroleum, Dehradun, and such other agencies as may be specified by the Central Government for granting a certificate by that agency as to the compliance of provisions of the Act and these rules." 7. It is the case of the appellant that the certificate dated 24-5-2000 issued by ARAI, Pune to the appellant accompanied by approved drawings of the auto-rickshaw and the certificate dated 6-3-2000 would show that the Vikram 750-D auto-rickshaw was designed for seating capacity of six passengers plus one driver. The appellant has also produced copies of registration certificates issued by authorities under Motor Vehicles Act in different States, in respect of three-wheeler vehicle ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... itted that payload capacity only means that the vehicle can safely carry that much load. Three-wheeler chassis is tested on maximum load of 750 Kgs. Total weight of six persons will work out as 420 Kgs. at the rate of 70 Kgs. per person. Permissible free luggage for six passengers at the rate 35 Kgs. per passenger would come to 210 Kgs. Taking into consideration the weight of the driver also the total would come to 700 Kgs. without including the weight of the body of the auto-rickshaw. It was on this basis the payload is shown as 750 Kgs. The appellant would, therefore, contend that the claim in the pamphlet on the payload will not go against the passenger carrying capacity of the vehicle, as claimed by the assessee. 10. The Commissioner h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . The explanation offered by the assessee that dual seat in driver's cabin was meant only in respect of three-wheeler used as load carrier or delivery van is only to be accepted. 12. The reason given by the Commissioner for rejecting the contention of the assessee regarding the load carrying capacity is also not acceptable. It is true that each passenger may not carry 35 Kgs. in all cases. But when a vehicle is designed it should have the capacity to carry full load, namely, six passengers with their luggage as allowed under the Rules and the driver. Therefore, we do not find any reason to reject the claim of the appellant that the chassis manufactured by it is meant only for three-wheelers with a passenger capacity of six persons excludin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
