Top
Begin typing your search above and press return to search.

CESTAT Quashes Excise Duty Demand on Body building of Multi Role Riot control vehicle on ground of Excise Duty Exemption Eligibility [Read Order]

CESTAT Quashes Excise Duty Demand on Body building of Multi Role Riot control vehicle on ground of Excise Duty Exemption Eligibility [Read Order]
X

The Chandigarh bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) quashed the excise duty demand on the body building of a multi-role riot control vehicle on the grounds of excise duty exemption eligibility. Metaltech Motor Bodies Pvt. Limited, the respondent assessee is building bodies of the vehicles, known as Riot Control Vehicles (Vajra Vahan) on the...


The Chandigarh bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) quashed the excise duty demand on the body building of a multi-role riot control vehicle on the grounds of excise duty exemption eligibility. 

Metaltech Motor Bodies Pvt. Limited, the respondent assessee is building bodies of the vehicles, known as Riot Control Vehicles (Vajra Vahan) on the Chases received from Tata Motors and availing exemption contained under Sl No.39 of Notification No.6/2006. 

The revenue appealed against the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) for dropping the excise duty demand imposed against the assessee. 

Rajeev Gupta, assisted by Nikhil Kumar Singh and Narinder Singh, the counsels for the department contended that the Vajra Vahan is not a special vehicle and is classifiable along with ambulances, which also have life-carrying equipment, principally designed for carrying patients; therefore, the correct classification would be under CETH 8703 2392. 

R.K. Hasija, assisted by Shivang Puri, the counsel for the assessee contended that the Vahan, a multi-role riot control vehicle, which is specially constructed and fitted with equipment to enable to perform specified functions and is not principally designed for the transport of passengers or personnel and eligible for the exemption. 

The Bench observed that there is no estoppel in revenue matters; no party can be expected to continue the mistake, if any, which occurred in the past and that the assessee has a legal right to change the classification. 

The two-member bench comprising S S Garg (Judicial) and Anjani Kumar (Technical) upheld the classification made by the assessee. 

To Read the full text of the Order CLICK HERE

Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates

Next Story

Related Stories

Advertisement
Advertisement
All Rights Reserved. Copyright @2019