TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Tribunal classifies steel seat assembly for tractors under Tariff Item 68; not exempt under Notification</h1> The Tribunal classified the steel seat assembly for tractors under Tariff Item 68, not qualifying for exemption under Notification No. 91/68-CE. The ... Classification Issues Involved:1. Classification of steel seat assembly for tractors.2. Eligibility for exemption under Notification No. 91/68-CE.3. Definition and scope of the term 'automobile.'4. Interpretation of Tariff Items 40 and 68.Detailed Analysis:1. Classification of Steel Seat Assembly for Tractors:The appellants classified the steel seat assembly for tractors under Tariff Item 40 (Steel furniture and parts thereof) and sought exemption under Notification No. 91/68-CE. The revised classification list was provisionally approved but later rejected. The authorities insisted on classifying the item under Tariff Item 68 (Motor Vehicle parts not otherwise specified), which does not qualify for the exemption.2. Eligibility for Exemption under Notification No. 91/68-CE:The appellants argued that Notification No. 91/68-CE exempts steel seats designed for use in automobiles, railway carriages, and aircraft. They contended that since tractors are considered automobiles, the steel seat assembly should be eligible for exemption. However, the lower authorities rejected this, asserting that the steel seat assembly does not qualify as furniture under Tariff Item 40 and thus does not qualify for the exemption.3. Definition and Scope of the Term 'Automobile':The Departmental Representative argued that a tractor is not an automobile, relying on the definition from the McGraw Hill Dictionary of Scientific and Technical Terms. However, the Tribunal found that the same dictionary defines 'automotive vehicle' to include tractors, thereby rejecting the contention that tractors are not automobiles. The Tribunal emphasized that common parlance and ordinary understanding should prevail over strict dictionary definitions.4. Interpretation of Tariff Items 40 and 68:- Tariff Item 40: Defined as 'Steel furniture made partly or wholly of steel, whether in assembled or unassembled condition and parts of such steel furniture.' The Tribunal noted that furniture typically refers to items of convenience or decoration used in homes, offices, or public buildings and should be movable and marketable.- Tariff Item 68: Covers 'All other goods not elsewhere specified,' excluding certain items like alcohol and narcotics.The Tribunal applied tests from previous rulings (e.g., Tata Engg. & Locomotive v. Collector of Central Excise) to determine that the steel seat assembly for tractors does not qualify as furniture. It is not a piece of decoration, is not movable, and is not bought and sold in the market as furniture. Therefore, it cannot be classified under Tariff Item 40 and is not eligible for the exemption under Notification No. 91/68-CE.Conclusion:The Tribunal concluded that the steel seat assembly for tractors should be classified under Tariff Item 68 and is not eligible for the exemption under Notification No. 91/68-CE. The appeal was dismissed, affirming the lower authorities' decisions.Separate Judgment:Member K. Prakash Anand concurred with the judgment, citing previous decisions that seats fixed to vehicles are considered fixtures rather than furniture, thereby supporting the dismissal of the appeal.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
