Tribunal classifies dumper placer as special purpose motor vehicle, granting exemption benefits

MANIAR & COMPANY Versus COLLECTOR OF C. EX., AHMEDABAD

MANIAR & COMPANY Versus COLLECTOR OF C. EX., AHMEDABAD - 2000 (119) E.L.T. 418 (Tribunal) Issues involved: Classification of dumper placer under Central Excise Tariff - Whether under Heading 87.04 as motor vehicle for transport of goods or under Heading 87.05 as special purpose motor vehicle.

Summary:
The appellants appealed against the order-in-appeal by the Collector of Central Excise classifying dumper placers under Chapter Heading 87.04 and granting benefits under Notification 162/86. The appellants claimed classification under Heading 85.05 and exemption under Notification No. 162/86. The issue was whether the dumper placer is a motor vehicle for transport of goods under Heading 87.04 as argued by the Revenue or a special purpose motor vehicle under Heading 87.05 as claimed by the appellants.

The appellants contended that the dumper placer, used for garbage collection, is not a motor vehicle for transport of goods but a special purpose vehicle under Heading 87.05. They argued that the dumper placer is custom-made for garbage collection, not for general goods transportation. The Revenue argued that since the vehicle transports garbage, which is considered goods, it should be classified under Heading 87.04.

After considering the facts, the Tribunal found that the dumper placer is specifically designed for collecting garbage containers, not for general goods transportation. As it is not used for transporting goods other than garbage, it does not fall under Heading 87.04 for motor vehicles for transport of goods. Instead, it is classified under Heading 87.05 for special purpose motor vehicles. The Tribunal also noted that Notification No. 162/86 provides for nil rate of duty for special purpose motor vehicles falling under Heading 87.05 if appropriate excise duty has been paid on the chasis and equipment used in manufacturing. Therefore, the appellants were entitled to the benefits under this notification.

Accordingly, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed in favor of the appellants.