2001 (1) TMI 802

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

...., for the Respondent. [Order per : V.K. Agrawal, Member (T)]. - In this appeal, preferred by Revenue, the issue involved is whether the benefit of Exemption Notification No. 462/86-C.E., dated 9-12-86 is available to the Respondents who fabricate body on the chasis of the motor vehicles. 2. Shri M.P. Singh, learned D.R., submitted that M/s. Sita Singh Engineers & Sons are engaged in the m....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ructure or equipment on the chassis shall amount to manufacture of a motor vehicle falling under Heading No. 87.01 to 87.05 of the Tariff was held not to have survived in view of the dismissal of the appeal in the case of Kamal Auto Industries on merits. Reliance was also placed on the decision in the case of Haryana Roadways Engg. Corporation Ltd. v. CCE, New Delhi, [2001 (131) E.L.T. 662] wherei....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....emption under Notification No. 462/86. He, further, submitted that Rule 9B of Central Excise Rules at the relevant time did not provide provisional assessment where the matter in issue pertains to the availability or otherwise of an exemption notification. 4. We have considered the submissions of both the sides. The Supreme Court in the case of CCE v. Ram Body Builders, [1997 (94) E.L.T. 442....