2023 (11) TMI 413 - AT - Central Excise

Revenue loses appeal on Tata-207 Vajra riot control vehicle classification under CETH 8705 special purpose vehicles

CESTAT Chandigarh dismissed Revenue's appeal regarding classification of Tata-207 Vajra Vahan riot control vehicle. The vehicle was classified under CETH ... Classification of goods - Tata-207 Vajra Vahan - merits classification as a specially designed vehicle falling under CETH 8705 or a vehicle principally designed for transport of passengers falling under CETH 8703? - change in classification - HELD THAT:- The Department argues on the point that the impugned vehicle does not fall under the above group going by the principles of ejusdem generis and for these reasons, the impugned vehicle should be categorized along with vehicles falling under CETH 8703 3392 along with vehicles like ambulances, prison vans etc. Interestingly, learned Commissioner in the impugned order relies on the same principle to classify the goods under CETH 8705. It is to see whether the vehicle is a special purpose vehicle or meant for transportation of persons though with some additional features. From the material available on record, it is found that the vehicle is specially adopted, equipped and designed for riot control. It is not the case of the Revenue that the vehicle is utilized for transportation of police personnel alone. A distinction has to be made between the basic manufacture of the vehicle and the body build upon it. An undisputed fact in the case is that the chassis supplied by M/s Tata Motors is similar to all the vehicles in the series 207 or others. It is the body-builders like the appellants give shape to the vehicle depending on the requirement. The design of the impugned vehicle has been conceptualized by VRDE and DRDO to suit special requirements. Understandably, in the impugned case, the vehicle is made to have so many features that help the police personnel in controlling riots. It could be that the vehicle may be helpful to carry the police personnel to a place where the riots are taking place. However, for that reason, the vehicle does not cease to be special purpose vehicle - Most of the vehicles classifiable under CETH 8705 do also require personnel to man the vehicle and use the equipment provided. Such personnel also need to be transported and for that reason, such vehicles cannot be held to be primarily designed for transportation of personnel. The certificate, for compliance to the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, issued by VRDE, Ahmednagar has classified the vehicle as special purpose vehicle (multi role riot control vehicle) - accordingly, the Transport Commissioner of Uttar Pradesh has also certified the same - the Larger Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Mahindra & Mahindra [2015 (4) TMI 563 - CESTAT MUMBAI] held that Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and chapter 87 of Central Excise Tariff Act are pari materia Statutes for the purpose of determining the classification of motor vehicles - the certificates issued by VRDE and the Transport Commissioner cannot be ignored unless the same are proved to be wrong or inconsistent with the provisions of the Statute. Change in classification - HELD THAT:- The Department also argued that the appellants have classified the impugned vehicles earlier under CETH 8707 and have changed the classification to avail the benefit of notification - It is found that there is no estoppel in revenue matters; no party can be expected to continue the mistake, if any, which occurred in the past and that the appellants have a legal right to change the classification. Thus, no case has been made by the Revenue so as to interfere with the impugned order as far as the classification of the impugned special purpose vehicle (multi role riot control vehicle) is concerned - the appeal is devoid of any merits and therefore is liable to be dismissed - appeal dismissed. Issues involved:Classification of Vajra Vahan-207 under Central Excise Tariff Headings (CETH) 8703 3392 or 8705 9000.Classification under CETH 8705:- The Vajra Vahan is specially designed for non-transport functions like riot control and fighting terrorism.- Fitted with various equipment for specific functions, classified as a special purpose motor vehicle.- Supported by HSN explanatory notes and previous case laws for classification under CETH 8705.- Transport authorities' registration and expert opinions considered for classification.- Heading 8705 covers vehicles with non-transport functions, not primarily for passenger or goods transport.- Upheld the Commissioner's decision on classification under CETH 8705, eligible for exemption under Notification No.06/2006-CE.Argument for Classification under CETH 8703:- Revenue argues Vajra Vahan should be classified under CETH 8703 3392, along with ambulances, based on ejusdem generis principle.- Contention that Vajra Vahan is not a special vehicle and akin to vans used for transporting prisoners or ambulances.- Department's stance that the vehicle is primarily designed for transporting persons, not for specific non-transport functions.Decision and Rationale:- The Vajra Vahan is a special purpose vehicle principally designed for riot control, supported by VRDE and DRDO certifications.- Certification by VRDE and Transport Commissioner considered in line with the Motor Vehicles Act for classification.- No evidence presented to challenge the validity of certifications or the classification as a special purpose vehicle.- Previous classification under a different heading not a bar to changing classification to avail benefits.- Upheld the Commissioner's classification under CETH 8705, dismissing the appeal for lack of merit.Judgment Date:Pronounced on 08/11/2023.