https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=762887 CESTAT Ahmedabad held that the appellant's activity of building bus body structures on chassis was not liable for excise duty. The tribunal found serious errors in the show cause notice and adjudication order, which incorrectly proposed classification under CETH 8707 and later under 8703/8704. The motor vehicle with 41-passenger capacity could not be classified under either 8703 (<=10 passengers) or 8704 (goods transport). Additionally, the vehicle qualified for exemption under Notification 12/2012-CE as the appellant was not registered for central excise and had not availed CENVAT credit. The impugned orders were set aside and appeal allowed. en-us Fri, 06 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 10 Dec 2024 08:58:15 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=762887 CESTAT Ahmedabad held that the appellant's activity of building bus body structures on chassis was not liable for excise duty. The tribunal found serious errors in the show cause notice and adjudication order, which incorrectly proposed classification under CETH 8707 and later under 8703/8704. The motor vehicle with 41-passenger capacity could not be classified under either 8703 (<=10 passengers) or 8704 (goods transport). Additionally, the vehicle qualified for exemption under Notification 12/2012-CE as the appellant was not registered for central excise and had not availed CENVAT credit. The impugned orders were set aside and appeal allowed. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 06 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=762887