Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / TMI Blogs / RSS

1999 (11) TMI 359

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Excise Tariff and also held to be entitled for the benefit of Notification 162/86 dated 1-3-1986 as provided at Sl. No. 8 of the notification. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the appellants are manufacturing dumper placer on the duty-paid chasis supplied by the customers. The appellants filed a classification list for the said dumper placer claiming the classification under Heading 85.05 of the Central Excise Tariff and claimed the exemption, as provided at sl. No. 11 of the Notification No. 162/86, dated 1-3-1986 attracting nil rate of duty. A show cause notice was issued to the appellants for classifying the product under Heading 87.04 of the Central Excise Tariff and for granting the benefit as providad at Sl. No. 10 of the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Sl. No. 11. 4.  Ld. D.R. appearing on behalf of the Revenue, submits that dumper placer, manufactured by the appellants, are meant for transportation of garbage which can be treated as goods as this vehicle is used for transportation of goods, therefore, are rightly classifiable under Heading 87.04 of the Central Excise Tariff, as this heading specifically covers the motor vehicles for transportation of goods. He also relies upon the description given in the HSN and submits that as per HSN the refuge collectors are covered under Heading 87.04. He therefore preys that the appeal be dismissed. 5.  Heard both sides. 6. In this case the issue is whether the dumper placer manufactured by the appellants are classifiable un....